File Format:

Adobe Reader

161616996
National Survfvf ey of
Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated
rRrRrRecrenenenation
U.S. Department of Commerce
William M. Daley, Secretary
Robert L. Mallet, Deputy Secretary
Economics and Statistics Administration
Lee Price, Acting Under Secretary
for Economic Affairs
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Martha Farnsworth Riche, Director
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Issued November 1997
FHW/96 NAT
As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most
of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of
our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural
values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through
outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure
their development in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibil-ity
for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S.
administration.
The mission of the Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish
and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is respon-sible
for national programs of vital importance to our natural resources, including administration of the
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration and the Federal Aid of Wildlife Restoration Programs. These two
grant programs provide financial assistance to the States for projects to enhance and protect fish and
wildlife resources and to assure their availability to the public for recreational purposes. Funds from the
administrative portion of these programs are used to pay for the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Suggested Citation
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau
of the Census. 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Economics and Statistics
Administration
Lee Price, Acting Under Secretary
for Economic Affairs
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Martha Farnesworth Riche, Director
Bradford R. Huther, Deputy Director
Nancy M. Gordon, Associate Director
for Demographic Programs
U.S. Department of Interior
Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Division of Federal Aid
Robert E. Lange, Jr., Chief
iii
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Foreword ................................................................................................................................................ vi
Survey Background and Method ............................................................................................................ vii
Highlights
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Summary................................................................................................................................................. 4
Fishing Highlights .................................................................................................................................... 8
Hunting Highlights ................................................................................................................................. 22
Wildlife-Watching Highlights ...................................................................................................................34
Tables
Guide to Statistical Tables ...................................................................................................................... 56
Fishing and Hunting Tables ....................................................................................................................58
Wildlife-Watching Tables ........................................................................................................................ 87
State Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 97
Appendices
A. Definitions .................................................................................................................................... A-2
B. Comparability With Previous Surveys ........................................................................................... B-2
C. Selected Data From Screening Interviews.................................................................................... C-2
D. Sample Design and Statistical Accuracy ...................................................................................... D-2
Contents
iv
Fishing and Hunting: 1996
1. Anglers and Hunters 16 Years Old and Older, Days of Participation, and Trips,
by Type of Fishing and Hunting ....................................................................................................... 58
2. Anglers, Trips, and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fishing .................................................................. 58
3. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish ..............................................................59
4. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish .............................................................59
5. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish ................................................................. 60
6. Hunters, Trips, and Days of Hunting, by Type of Hunting ................................................................ 60
7. Hunters and Days of Hunting, by Type of Game .............................................................................61
8. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters ........................................................................... 62
9. Selected Characteristics of Anglers, by Type of Fishing ................................................................. 64
10. Selected Characteristics of Hunters, by Type of Hunting ................................................................ 66
11. Summary of Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting ........................................................................ 68
12. Expenditures for Fishing .................................................................................................................69
13. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing ..............................................................70
14. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing, Except Great Lakes ............................. 71
15. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Great Lakes Fishing .............................................................72
16. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Saltwater Fishing ................................................................. 73
17. Expenditures for Hunting ................................................................................................................74
18. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Big Game Hunting ............................................................... 75
19. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Small Game Hunting ...........................................................76
20. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Migratory Bird Hunting ......................................................... 77
21. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Hunting Other Animals ........................................................ 78
22. Special Equipment Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting ..............................................................79
23. Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses or Were Exempt ................................................... 79
24. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses .................................. 80
25. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Water ............................................................81
26. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Great Lake ..............................................................81
27. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public and Private Land, by Type of Hunting .............................. 81
28. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public Land, by Selected Characteristic ..................................... 82
29. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Private Land, by Selected Characteristic .................................... 83
30. Participation in Catch and Release Fishing, Ice Fishing, and Fly-Fishing ...................................... 84
31. Hunters Using Bows and Arrows, Muzzleloaders, and Other Primitive Firearms for Hunting ......... 84
32. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Fishing and Hunting ...................................... 85
33. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Fishing and Hunting ............................................... 85
34. Why Anglers and Hunters Did Not Participate More in 1996 .......................................................... 86
Wildlife-Watching Activities: 1996
35. Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Type of Activity .......................................................................... 87
36. Participants, Trips, and Days of Participation in Nonresidential (Away From Home)
Wildlife-Watching Activities ............................................................................................................. 87
37. Participation in Residential (Around the Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities .................................. 88
38. Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Area or Site Visited ...........................................89
List of Tables
v
39. Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Wildlife Observed,
Photographed, or Fed and Place .................................................................................................... 90
40. Expenditures for Wildlife Watching ..................................................................................................91
41. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activities .................. 92
42. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Residential Wildlife-Watching Activities ....................... 94
43. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Wildlife Watching ........................................... 96
44. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Wildlife Watching .................................................... 96
45. Participation of Wildlife-Watching Participants in Fishing and Hunting ........................................... 96
46. Participation of Sportsmen in Wildlife-Watching Activities ..............................................................96
State Wildlife-Related Recreation: 1996
47. Participants in Wildlife-Related Recreation, by Participant’s State of Residence ........................... 97
48. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation, by State Where Spending Took Place .................... 98
49. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation, by Participant’s State of Residence ...................... 100
50. Anglers and Hunters, by Sportsman’s State of Residence ........................................................... 102
51. Anglers and Hunters, by State Where Fishing or Hunting Took Place ..........................................103
52. Hunters, by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place .............................................. 104
53. Days of Hunting, by State Where Hunting Took Place and Hunter’s State of Residence ............. 105
54. Days of Hunting, by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place ................................. 106
55. Expenditures for Hunting, by State Where Spending Took Place ................................................. 107
56. Freshwater (Except Great Lakes) Anglers and Days of Fishing, by State Where Fishing
Took Place ...................................................................................................................................108
57. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Great Lakes Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place .......109
58. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Saltwater Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place................ 109
59. Days of Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place and Angler’s State of Residence ............... 110
60. Expenditures for Fishing, by State Where Spending Took Place .................................................. 111
61. Participants in Wildlife-Watching Activities, by Participant’s State of Residence ..........................112
62. Participants in Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activities, by State Where Activity Took Place .. 113
63. Days of Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activity, by State Where Activity Took Place
and Participant’s State of Residence ............................................................................................ 114
64. Expenditures for Wildlife-Watching Activities, by State Where Spending Took Place ................... 115
vi
Foreword Ours is a country with a rich
tradition of enjoying nature.
Whether casting a fly or snap-ping
a shutter, Americans find
wildlife-associated recreation a
source of lifelong enjoyment
and renewal.
The results of the 1996 National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation
reflect this national passion for
wild things and wild places.
Seventy-seven million Ameri-cans
16 years or older, or 40
percent of the adult population,
enjoyed some form of wildlife-related
recreation during 1996.
In doing so, they pumped $100
billion into the national economy,
supporting hundreds of thou-sands
of jobs.
The mission of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service is to con-serve
and enhance our nation’s
fish and wildlife and its habitat.
The Service works in partner-ship
with state wildlife agencies,
conservation organizations,
sportsmen’s groups, local
governments, corporations,
and individual citizens to
perform this mission.
For conservation efforts to
be effective, however, natural
resource managers need de-tailed
information on how people
use fish and wildlife resources.
The 1996 National Survey
of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation is
the most comprehensive survey
of its kind. It is an important tool
for natural resource profession-als
in planning and managing
these resources for the enjoy-ment
and benefit of all Ameri-cans.
The 1996 Survey was requested
by the States through the Inter-national
Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies. It is the
ninth in a series of surveys on
resource use by anglers, hunt-ers,
and those who enjoy ob-serving
wildlife. The Survey has
been sponsored by the Service
since 1955. It is financed by
hunters, anglers, and boaters
through excise taxes on sporting
arms, ammunition, fishing
equipment, and motorboat fuels
as authorized under the Federal
Aid in Sport Fish and Wildlife
Restoration Acts.
We can all be gratified that
wildlife-related recreation and
the conservation ethic that flows
from it remain strong in America.
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
vii
Survey
Background
and
Method
The National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation (Survey) has been
conducted since 1955 and is
one of the oldest and most
comprehensive continuing
recreation surveys. The purpose
of the Survey is to gather infor-mation
on the number of anglers,
hunters, and wildlife-watching
participants (formerly known as
primary nonconsumptive wildlife-related
participants) in the
United States. Information
also is collected on how often
these recreationists participate
and how much they spend on
their activities.
The planning process for the
1996 Survey began in 1994
when the International Associa-tion
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
(IAFWA) passed a resolution
asking the Fish and Wildlife
Service to conduct the ninth
National Survey of wildlife-related
recreation. Funding for
the Survey came from the ad-ministrative
portion of the Fed-eral
Aid in Sport Fish and Wild-life
Restoration Programs.
Consultations with State and
Federal agencies and nongov-ernmental
organizations such as
the Wildlife Management Insti-tute,
American Sportfishing
Association, B.A.S.S., Inc., Wild
Bird Feeding Institute, and
American Fisheries Society
started in early 1994 to ascertain
survey content. Other
sportsmen’s organizations and
conservation groups, industry
representatives, and researchers
also provided valuable advice on
questionnaire development, data
collection, and reporting.
Four regional technical commit-tees
were set up under the
auspices of the IAFWA to ensure
that State fish and wildlife
agencies had an opportunity to
participate in all phases of
survey planning and design.
The committees were made up
of agency representatives.
The Survey was conducted in
two phases by the U.S. Bureau
of Census for the Fish and
Wildlife Service. The first phase
was the screen which began in
April 1996. During the screening
phase, the Bureau of Census
interviewed a sample of 80,000
households nationwide, primarily
by telephone, to determine who
in the household had fished,
hunted, or engaged in wildlife-watching
activities in 1995, and
who had engaged or planned to
engage in those activities in
1996. In most cases, one adult
household member provided
information for all household
members. It is important to note
that the screen primarily covered
1995 activities while the next,
more in-depth phase covered
1996 activities. For more infor-mation
on the 1995 data, refer to
Appendix C.
The second phase of the Sur-vey
consisted of detailed inter-views
conducted about every
four months. The first interview
wave began in April 1996, the
second in September 1996, and
the last in January 1997. Inter-views
were conducted with
samples of likely anglers, hunt-ers,
and wildlife-watching partici-pants
who were identified in the
initial screening phase. These
interviews were conducted
viii
primarily by telephone, with in-person
interviews for those
respondents who could not be
reached by telephone. Respon-dents
in the second survey
phase were limited to those at
least 16 years old. Each respon-dent
provided information per-taining
only to his or her activi-ties
and expenditures. Sample
sizes were designed to provide
statistically reliable results at the
State level for fishing, hunting,
and wildlife-watching activities.
Altogether, interviews were
completed for 22,578 anglers
and hunters and 11,759 wildlife
watchers. More detailed infor-mation
on sampling procedures
and response rates is found in
Appendix D.
Comparability with
Previous Surveys
The 1996 Survey questions and
methodology were similar to
those used in the 1991 Survey.
Therefore, the 1996 estimates
are comparable to the 1991
estimates. The 1996 Survey
was the first to use computer-assisted
interviews which im-proved
the efficiency and timeli-ness
of data collection.
The methodology of the 1996
and 1991 Surveys did differ
significantly from the 1985 and
1980 Surveys, so their estimates
are not directly comparable to
those earlier surveys. The
changes in methodology in-cluded
reducing the recall
period over which respondents
had to remember their activities
and expenditures. Previous
Surveys used a 12-month
recall period which resulted in
greater reporting bias. Research
on recall bias found that the
amount of activity and expendi-tures
reported in 12-month
recall Surveys was over-esti-mated
in comparison with the
amount reported in shorter
recall periods.
The trends information pre-sented
in this report takes
the differences of the earlier
surveys into account in compar-ing
their estimates with those
of the 1996 and 1991 Surveys.
See the Summary Section and
Appendix B.
1
Highlights
2
Introduction The National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation reports results from
interviews with U.S. residents
about their fishing, hunting, and
other fish- and wildlife-related
recreation. This report focuses
on 1996 participation and expen-ditures
of U.S. residents 16
years of age and older.
The numbers reported can be
compared with those in the 1991
Survey reports. The methodol-ogy
used in 1996 was similar to
that used in 1991. These results
should not be directly compared
with the results from Surveys
earlier than 1991 because of
changes in methodology. These
changes in methodology were
made in 1991 and 1996 to
improve accuracy in the informa-tion
provided. Trend information
from 1955 to 1985 is presented
in Appendix B.
The report also provides
information on participation in
wildlife-related recreation in
1995, particularly of persons
6 to 15 years of age. The 1995
information is provided in
Appendix C. Additional informa-tion
about the scope and cover-age
of the Survey can be found
in the Survey Background and
Method section of this report.
The remainder of this section
defines important terms used
in the Survey.
Wildlife-Associated
Recreation
Wildlife-associated recreation
includes fishing, hunting, and
wildlife-watching activities.
These categories are not mutu-ally
exclusive because many
individuals enjoyed fish and
wildlife in several ways in 1996.
Wildlife-associated recreation is
reported in two major categories:
(1) fishing and hunting, and (2)
wildlife watching (formerly
referred to as nonconsumptive
wildlife-related recreation).
Wildlife-watching includes
observing, photographing, and
feeding fish and wildlife.
Fishing and Hunting
This Survey reports information
about residents of the United
States who fished or hunted in
1996, regardless of whether they
were licensed. The fishing and
hunting sections of this report
are organized to report three
groups: (1) sportsmen, (2)
anglers, and (3) hunters.
Sportsmen
Sportsmen are persons who
fished or hunted. Individuals
who fished or hunted commer-cially
in 1996 are reported as
sportsmen only if they fished or
hunted for recreation. The
sportsmen group is composed of
the three subgroups in the
diagram below: (1) those who
Sportsmen
Anglers Hunters
Fished
and
hunted
Fished
only
Hunted
only
3
fished and hunted, (2) those
who only fished, and (3) those
who only hunted. The total
number of sportsmen is equal to
the sum of people who only
fished, only hunted, and both
hunted and fished. It is not the
sum of all anglers and all hunt-ers,
because those people who
both fished and hunted are
included in both the angler and
hunter population and would be
incorrectly counted twice.
Anglers
Anglers are sportsmen who only
fished plus those who fished and
hunted. The angler group
includes not only licensed hook
and line anglers, but also those
who have no license and those
who use special methods such
as fishing with spears. Three
types of fishing are reported: (1)
freshwater, excluding the Great
Lakes, (2) Great Lakes, and (3)
saltwater. Since many anglers
enjoyed more than one type of
fishing, the total number of
anglers is less than the sum of
the three types of fishing.
Hunters
Hunters are sportsmen who only
hunted plus those who hunted
and fished. The hunter group
includes not only licensed
hunters using common hunting
practices, but also those who
have no license and those who
engaged in hunting with a bow
and arrow, muzzleloader, other
primitive firearms, or a pistol or
handgun. Four types of hunting
are reported: (1) big game, (2)
small game, (3) migratory bird,
and (4) other animals. Since
many hunters enjoyed more than
one type of hunting, the sum of
hunters for big game, small
game, migratory bird, and other
animals exceeds the total num-ber
of hunters.
Wildlife-Watching
Activities
(formerly Nonconsumptive
Wildlife-Related Recreation)
Since 1980, the National Survey
of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-
Associated Recreation has
included information on wildlife-watching
activities in addition to
fishing and hunting. However,
the 1991 and 1996 Surveys,
unlike the 1980 and 1985 Sur-veys,
collected data only for
those activities where the pri-mary
purpose was wildlife
watching (observing, photo-graphing,
or feeding wildlife).
Secondary wildlife-watching
activities, such as incidentally
observing wildlife while pleasure
driving, are not included.
Many people, including sports-men,
enjoyed wildlife-related
recreation other than fishing or
hunting. We refer to these
nonharvesting activities, such as
observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
fish and other wildlife,
as wildlife-watching activities.
Two types of wildlife-watching
activity are reported: (1) non-residential
and (2) residential.
Because some people partici-pate
in more than one type of
wildlife-watching activity, the sum
of participants in each type will
be greater than the total number
of wildlife-watching participants.
Only those engaged in activities
whose primary purpose was
wildlife watching are included in
the Survey. The two types of
wildlife-watching activities are
defined below.
Nonresidential
This group included persons
who took trips or outings of at
least 1 mile for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
or photographing fish and
wildlife. Trips to fish or hunt
or scout and trips to zoos,
circuses, aquariums, and
museums were not considered
wildlife-watching activities.
Residential
This group included those whose
activities are within 1 mile of
home and involve one or more of
the following: (1) closely observ-ing
or trying to identify birds or
other wildlife; (2) photographing
wildlife; (3) feeding birds or other
wildlife on a regular basis; (4)
maintaining natural areas of at
least one-quarter acre where
benefit to wildlife is the primary
concern; (5) maintaining
plantings (shrubs, agricultural
crops, etc.) where benefit to
wildlife is the primary concern; or
(6) visiting public parks within 1
mile of home for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
or photographing wildlife.
4
Total Wildlife-Associated
Recreation
Participants 77 million
Expenditures $101 billion
Sportsmen
Total participants 39.7 million
Anglers 35.2 million
Hunters 14.0 million
Total days 883 million
Anglers 626 million
Hunters 257 million
Total expenditures $72 billion
Fishing $38 billion
Hunting $21 billion
Unspecified $14 billion
Wildlife Watching
Total participants 62.9 million
Residential 60.8 million
Nonresidential 23.7 million
Total expenditures $29 billion
Summary The Survey revealed that 77
million U.S. residents 16 years
old and older participated in
wildlife-related recreation activi-ties
in 1996. During that year,
35.2 million people fished, 14.0
million hunted, and 62.9 million
enjoyed at least one type of
wildlife-watching recreation
activity including observing,
feeding, or photographing fish
and other wildlife, in the
United States.
The information for participation
and expenditures of persons 16
years old and older is based on
estimates from the detailed
phase of the 1996 Survey. This
information is comparable with
estimates from the 1991 Survey,
but not with earlier ones because
of changes in methodology. A
complete explanation is provided
in Appendix B.
Persons 6 to 15 years old
were not included in the second
phase (detailed) interviews of
1996 participants. However, an
estimate of their participation
was calculated using data from
the 1991 and 1996 screening
surveys. Both screening sources
had nearly identical proportions
of 6- to 15- year-old participants
(9 percent for hunting; 22 per-cent
for fishing; and 16 percent
for wildlife-watching activity).
Based on these percentages,
there were 1.4 million hunters,
10.5 million anglers, and 12.0
million wildlife-watching partici-pants
6 to 15 years old in 1996.
More information on 6- to 15-
year-olds is provided in Appen-dix
C. For the rest of this report
all information pertains to partici-pants
16 years old and older,
unless otherwise indicated.
Among anglers, hunters, and
wildlife-watching participants,
there was a considerable overlap
in activities. In 1996, 68 percent
of the hunters also fished, and
27 percent of the anglers
hunted. In addition, 65 percent
of the anglers and 68 percent
of the hunters participated in
wildlife-watching activities, while
41 percent of all wildlife-watch-ing
participants reported hunting
and/or fishing during the year.
Expenditures associated with
wildlife-related recreation
totaled $101 billion in 1996.
5
Trip-related costs were $30.0
billion, while $60.4 billion was
spent on equipment and $10.8
billion was spent on other items.
Anglers spent a total of $37.8
billion, hunters $20.6 billion, and
wildlife-watching participants
$29.2 billion.
Fishing and Hunting
In 1996, 40 million U.S. residents
16 years old and older went
fishing and/or hunting. This
includes 35.2 million who fished
and 14 million who hunted. The
overage is accounted for by
those who both fished and
hunted, 9.5 million.
In 1996, expenditures by sports-men
totaled $71.9 billion. Trip-related
expenditures, including
those for food, lodging, and
transportation, were $20.5
billion, 29 percent of all fishing
and hunting expenditures.
Total equipment expenditures
amounted to $43.7 billion,
61 percent of the total. Other
expenditures such as those
for magazines, membership
dues, contributions, land
leasing and ownership, and
licenses, stamps, tags, and
permits accounted for $7.7
billion, or 11 pecent of all
sportsmen’s expenditures.
Wildlife-Watching
Recreation
Observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
wildlife was enjoyed by
62.9 million people 16 years old
and older in 1996. Among this
group, 23.7 million people took
trips for the primary purpose of
Other
$7.7 billion
11%
Equipment
$43.7 billion
Trip- 61%
related
$20.5 billion
29%
Sportsmen
unspecified
$13.5 billion
13%
Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation
(Total expenditures $101.2 billion)
Fishing
$37.8 billion
37%
Other
$10.8 billion
11%
Equipment
$60.4 billion
Trip- 60%
related
$30.0 billion
30%
Wildlife-watching
$29.2 billion
29%
Hunting
$20.6 billion
20%
Expenditures by Sportsmen
(Total expenditures $71.9 billion)
Other
$3.1 billion
11%
Equipment
$16.7 billion
Trip- 57%
related
$9.4 billion
32%
Expenditures by Wildlife-
Watching Participants
(Total expenditures $29.2 billion)
enjoying wildlife, while 60.8
million stayed within a mile of
their homes to participate in
wildlife-watching activities.
In 1996, wildlife-watching partici-pants
spent $29.2 billion. Trip-related
expenses, including
food, lodging, and transportation,
totaled $9.4 billion, 32 percent
of the total expenditures. A total
of $16.7 billion was spent on
equipment, 57 percent of all
wildlife-watching expenses.
The remaining $3.1 billion,
11 percent of the total, was
spent on magazines, member-ship
dues, and contributions
made to conservation or
wildlife-related organizations.
6
1991 and 1996
Comparison
A comparison of estimates from
the 1991 and 1996 Surveys
show that millions of Americans
continue to enjoy wildlife-related
recreation. While participation in
fishing and hunting remained the
same, expenditures increased
significantly over that 5-year
period. In 1991, there were 35.6
million anglers and 14.1 million
hunters. In 1996, there were
35.2 million anglers and 14.0
million hunters. In 1996, anglers
spent 37 percent more and
hunters spent 45 percent more
than they did in 1991 for their
trips and equipment.
Although participation in wildlife
watching (observing, feeding,
and photographing wildlife)
decreased by 17 percent, from
76.1 million in 1991 to 62.9
million in 1996, expenditures for
trips and equipment increased
by 21 percent.
1955 to 1996 Findings
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service has conducted these
National Surveys at approximate
5-year intervals since 1955 (see
Appendix B). A 41-year trend
can be traced for the number of
anglers and hunters that partici-pated
in a given year. The
number of wildlife-watching
participants can be traced over
16 years because wildlife watch-ing
has been part of the Survey
only since 1980.
Trends show that the number of
anglers increased at over twice
the rate of the U.S. population
growth from 1955 to 1966. The
U.S. population increased by 62
percent while the fishing popula-tion
increased by 138 percent
during that period.
The number of hunters also
increased over the 41-year
period, but not at a rate equal
to the overall population growth.
The number of hunters in-creased
41 percent from 1955
to 1996.
The number of wildlife-watching
participants who took trips away
from home for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
Wildlife-Watching
Participants: 1980-1996
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons
between the wildlife-related recreation activities)
Index (1980=100)
Hunters and Anglers: 1955-1996
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons
between the wildlife-related recreation activities)
Index (1955=100)
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990/
1991
1996 1980 1985 1990/1991 1996
0
U.S. Population
Residential wildlife feeding
Total nonresidential
U.S. Population
Anglers
Hunters
0
50
100
150
200
250
50
100
150
200
250
or photographing wildlife de-creased
12 percent from 1980 to
1996. The number of people who
fed wildlife around their home
decreased by 21 percent.
This trend information is based
on published findings from the
1955 to the 1996 Survey reports
and unpublished screening
data from the 1985 to 1991
Surveys. As explained in Appen-dix
B, the estimates from the
published reports of the 1985
and 1991 Surveys are not
directly comparable due to
methodological changes.
7
Fishing
8
Total Fishing
(In millions)
Total anglers
Freshwater
Saltwater
Days Trips
35.2
29.7
9.4
103 87
515 420
626
507
Anglers
Scale enlarged to show detail. Detail does not add to total because
of multiple responses.
Fishing
Highlights
In 1996, 35.2 million U.S.
residents 16 years old and
older enjoyed a variety of
fishing opportunities throughout
the United States. Anglers
fished 626 million days and
took 507 million fishing trips.
They spent almost $38 billion
on fishing-related expenses
during the year. Among the
29.7 million freshwater angers,
including those who fished in
the Great Lakes, 515 million
days were spent and 420 million
trips were taken freshwater
fishing. Freshwater anglers
spent $24.5 billion on freshwater
fishing trips and equipment.
Saltwater fishing attracted 9.4
million anglers who enjoyed 87
million trips on 103 million days.
They spent $8.1 billion on their
trips and equipment.
Total Fishing
Anglers 35.2 million
Freshwater 29.7 million
Saltwater 9.4 million
Days 626 million
Freshwater 515 million
Saltwater 103 million
Trips 507 million
Freshwater 420 million
Saltwater 87 million
Expenditures $37.8 billion
Freshwater 24.5 billion
Saltwater 8.1 billion
Unspecified 5.2 billion
Source: Tables 1, 12, 13, and 16
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses and nonresponse.
9
Expenditures
(Total expenditures $37.8 billion)
Percent of Total Fishing Expenditures
(Total expenditures $37.8 billion)
Unspecified
$5.2 billion
Saltwater
$8.1 billion
Freshwater
$24.5 billion
Other
9%
Equipment
51%
Trip-related
41%
Fishing Expenditures
Anglers spent $37.8 billion in
1996 including $15.4 billion
spent on travel-related costs, 41
percent of all fishing expendi-tures.
Six billion dollars, 39
percent of all trip-related costs,
was spent on food and lodging,
and $3.7 billion, 24 percent of
trip-related expenditures, was
spent on transportation. Other
trip expenditures such as land
use fees, guide fees, equipment
rental, boating expenses, and
bait cost anglers $5.7 billion, 37
percent of all trip expenses.
Fishing equipment expenditures
totaled $19.2 billion in 1996, 51
percent of all fishing expendi-tures.
Anglers spent $5.3 billion
on fishing equipment such as
rods, reels, tackle boxes, depth
finders, and artificial lures and
flies. This amounted to 28
percent of all equipment expen-ditures.
Auxiliary equipment,
such as camping equipment,
binoculars, and special fishing
clothing, amounted to $1.0
billion, 5 percent of equipment
costs. Special equipment such
as boats, vans, and trail bikes
cost anglers $12.8 billion, 67
percent of all equipment costs.
Anglers also spent a consider-able
amount on land leasing and
ownership, $2.3 billion or 6
percent of all expenditures. They
spent $902 million on maga-zines,
books, membership dues
and contributions, licenses,
stamps, tags, and permits.
Total Fishing Expenditures
Total fishing expenditures $37.8 billion
Total trip-related $15.4 billion
Food and lodging 6.0 billion
Transportation 3.7 billion
Other trip costs 5.7 billion
Total equipment expenditures $19.2 billion
Fishing equipment 5.3 billion
Auxiliary equipment 1.0 billion
Special equipment 12.8 billion
Total other fishing expenditures 3.2 million
Magazines, books 0.2 billion
Membership dues and contribution 0.2 billion
Land leasing and ownership 2.3 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits 0.6 billion
Source: Table 12
10
Freshwater Trip and
Equipment Expenditures
Great Lakes
$1.4 billion
Freshwater,
except Great
Lakes
$22.4 billion
Freshwater Fishing
(In millions)
Freshwater
Anglers
Freshwater
Days
Freshwater
Trips
29.7 29.0
20 17
485 403
515
420
Total
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Detail does not add to total
because of multiple responses.
2.0
Freshwater
Fishing Highlights
Freshwater fishing was the most
popular type of fishing. In 1996,
29.7 million Americans fished
515 million days and took 420
million trips. Their expenditures
for trips and equipment totaled
$24.2 billion for the year. Ex-cluding
those who fished the
Great Lakes, freshwater anglers
numbered 29.0 million, 82
percent of all anglers. Freshwa-ter
anglers who did not fish the
Great Lakes took 403 million
trips on 485 million days and
spent $22.4 billion on trips and
equipment for an average of
$776 per angler.
The 2.0 million anglers who
fished the Great Lakes enjoyed
20 million days and 17 million
trips fishing. Their trip and
equipment expenditures,
$1.4 billion, were 7 percent
of the total freshwater trip
and equipment expenditures.
Great Lakes anglers averaged
$689 for the year.
Freshwater Fishing
Expenditures
Trip and equipment expendi-tures
for freshwater fishing
(excluding the Great Lakes)
totaled $22.4 billion in 1996.
Total trip-related expenditures
came to $10.0 billion. Food
and lodging amounted to
$4.1 billion, 41 percent of all
trip-related costs. Transportation
costs were $2.8 billion, 28
percent of all freshwater trip
costs. Other trip-related ex-penses
for anglers fishing
freshwater other than the Great
Lakes included guide fees,
equipment rental, and bait at
a cost of $3.2 billion.
Over $12.4 billion was spent
on equipment for freshwater
fishing, excluding the Great
Lakes. Non-Great Lakes fresh-water
anglers purchased $3.5
billion of fishing equipment such
as rods and reels, tackle boxes,
depth finders, and artificial lures
and flies. Expenditures for
auxiliary equipment including
Freshwater Fishing
Anglers 29.7 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 29.0 million
Great Lakes 2.0 million
Days 515 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 485 million
Great Lakes 20 million
Trips 420 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 403 million
Great Lakes 17 million
Trip and equipment expenditures $24.2 billion
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 22.4 billion
Great Lakes 1.4 billion
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses
and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1, 13, 14, and 15
11
camping equipment and binocu-lars
totaled $692 million for the
year. Expenditures for special
equipment such as boats, vans,
and trail bikes accounted for
$8.2 billion.
Great Lakes anglers spent $1.4
billion on trips and equipment in
1996. Trip-related expenses
totaled $719 million. Of these
expenditures, almost $295
million was spent on food and
lodging, 41 percent of trip costs;
$141 million was spent on
transportation, 20 percent of trip
costs; and $283 million was
spent on other items such as
guide fees, equipment rental,
and bait, 39 percent of trip costs.
Great Lakes anglers spent
$686 million on equipment.
They bought $180 million worth
of fishing equipment (rods, reels,
etc.). They spent $35 million on
auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.)
and $471 million on the
purchase of special equipment
(boats, vans, etc.).
Saltwater Fishing
Highlights
In 1996, 9.4 million anglers
enjoyed saltwater fishing on 87
million trips totaling 103 million
days. Overall, they spent $8.1
billion during the year on trips
and equipment. Of their expen-ditures,
trip-related costs gar-nered
the largest portion, $4.6
billion. Food and lodging cost
$1.6 billion, 34 percent of trip
expenditures; transportation
costs totaled $824 million, or 18
percent of trip costs; and other
trip costs such as equipment
rental, bait, and guide fees were
$2.2 billion.
Saltwater anglers spent $3.4
billion on equipment. They spent
$1.1 billion on fishing equipment
(rods, reels, etc.), $138 million
on auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.), and
$2.2 billion on special equipment
(boats, vans, etc.)
Saltwater Fishing
Anglers 9.4 million
Days 103 million
Trips 87 million
Trips and equipment $8.1 billion
expenditures
Source: Tables 1 and 16
49%
Trip and Equipment
Expenditures
Trip-related
Equipment
Great Lakes Saltwater Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
51% 42% 55%
58%
45%
$1.4 billion
$8.1 billion
$22.4 billion
12
Comparative
Fishing by Type
of Fishing
Days per
angler
Trips per
angler
Trip
expenditures
per angler
Trip
expenditures
per day
18
17
10
11
14
$436
$346
$353
$25
$21
$36
$45
14
8
9
$492
All fishing
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Saltwater
Comparative
Fishing Highlights
In 1996, anglers spent an aver-age
of 18 days fishing and took
an average of 14 fishing trips.
Freshwater, non-Great Lakes
anglers averaged 17 days fishing
and 14 trips. While Great Lakes
anglers averaged 10 days fishing
and 8 trips, saltwater anglers
fished an average of 11 days
and took an average of 9 trips.
Overall, anglers spent an aver-age
of $1,072 on fishing-related
expenses in 1996. They aver-aged
$436 per angler on trip-related
expenses, a daily aver-age
of $25.
Freshwater anglers, excluding
the Great Lakes, averaged $346
per participant in 1996 for trip-related
expenses, $21 per day.
Great Lakes anglers spent an
average of $353 on trip-related
expenses, $36 per day. Salt-water
anglers averaged $492 on
their trip expenditures and spent
an average of $45 per day.
Fishing for
Selected Fish
Of the 29.0 million anglers who
fished freshwater sources other
than the Great Lakes, 12.7
million spent 191 million days
fishing for black bass. Panfish
were sought by 8.0 million
anglers on 103 million days.
Catfish and bullheads drew 7.4
million anglers on 91 million
days. About 6.4 million anglers
fished for crappie on 91 million
days. Trout fishing attracted 9.0
million anglers on 94 million
days in 1996, and 4.8 million
anglers fished for white bass and
striped bass on 62 million days.
Freshwater anglers also com-monly
fished for walleye, sauger,
salmon, and steelhead.
In 1996, 2.0 million anglers
fished the Great Lakes. Walleye
and sauger attracted 724 thou-sand
anglers on nearly 6 million
days. Perch were fished for on
more than 5 million days by 624
Selected Fish by Type of Fishing
(In millions)
Type of Fishing Anglers Days
Freshwater, except Great Lakes
Black bass 12.7 191
Trout 9.0 94
Panfish 8.0 103
Catfish/bullhead 7.4 91
Crappie 6.4 91
White bass, striped bass, 4.8 62
and striped bass hybrids
Great Lakes
Walleye/sauger 0.7 6
Perch 0.6 5
Salmon 0.6 4
Black bass 0.5 5
Lake trout 0.3 2
Steelhead 0.3 3
Saltwater
Flatfish (flounder, halibut) 2.6 29
Bluefish 1.5 13
Striped bass 1.4 15
Seatrout 1.2 14
Mackerel 0.7 5
Salmon 0.6 4
13
thousand Great Lakes anglers.
Salmon drew 587 thousand
anglers for almost 4 million days
of fishing. Black bass and lake
trout attracted 492 and 349
thousand anglers respectively.
Among the 9.4 million saltwater
anglers, 2.6 million fished for
flatfish, including flounder and
halibut, on 29 million days.
Bluefish were a favorite of 1.5
million anglers on 13 million
days. Seatrout was sought by
1.2 million anglers on 14 million
days, and 683 thousand anglers
fished for mackerel on 5 million
days. Striped bass were sought
by 1.4 million anglers on 15
million days. Four million days
were spent fishing for salmon by
637 thousand anglers
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. More than 1 out
of every 6 U.S. residents went
fishing. While the national
participation rate was 17 per-cent,
the regional rates ranged
from 12 percent in the Middle
Atlantic Division to 25 percent in
the West North Central Division.
The West North Central, East
North Central, East South
Central, West South Central,
South Atlantic, and Mountain
Divisions all reported participa-tion
rates above the national
rate. The West South Central
Division had a participation rate
of 21 percent. The East South
Central and Mountain Divisions
had participation rates of 20
percent. The East North Central
and South Atlantic Divisions
both recorded participation rates
of 18 percent. The New England
Division recorded a participation
rate of 15 percent. The Pacific
Division had a participation rate
of 14 percent.
Fishing Participation
(National participation rate: 17%)
West South
Central
21%
East South
Central
20%
South
Atlantic
18%
New
England
15%
Middle
Atlantic
12%
East
North
Central
18%
West North
Central
25%
Mountain
20%
Pacific
14%
14
Fishing in State of
Residence and in
Other States
A majority of the 35.2 million
anglers who fished in 1996
did so within their home state.
Approximately 32.2 million
participants, 91 percent of all
anglers, fished in their state of
residence. More than 9.0 mil-lion,
26 percent, fished out-of-state.
Percentages do not add
to 100 because those sportsmen
who fished both in-state and
out-of-state were included in
both categories.
Most of the 29.0 million freshwa-ter
anglers (excluding the Great
Lakes) fished within their resi-dent
state, 26.6 million or 92
percent. Six million, 21 percent,
of these freshwater anglers,
fished out-of-state.
Eighty-two percent of Great
Lakes anglers enjoyed fishing
within their home state. Nearly
1.7 million anglers fished the
Great Lakes within their state
of residence. Comparatively,
479 thousand or 23 percent
of Great Lakes anglers fished
out-of-state.
Thirty-one percent of saltwater
anglers fished out-of-state.
Almost 7.2 million saltwater
anglers, 76 percent, also re-ported
fishing within the borders
of their home state. Those
saltwater anglers fishing out-of-state
numbered 2.9 million.
Fishing in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
In-State Out-of-State
Total Anglers 32.2 9.0
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes 26.6 6.0
Great Lakes 1.7 0.5
Saltwater 7.2 2.9
Source: Table 2
Percent of All Fishing, in State of
Residence and Other States
(Total: 35.2 million participants)
Other states
only
9%
In state of
residence
only
74%
In state of
residence and
in other states
17%
15
Days
Total freshwater
Lakes and
reservoirs
Rivers and
streams
24.8
Anglers
Types of Freshwater Fished,
Excluding Great Lakes
(In millions)
13.4
28.9
485
361
145
Total freshwater
(excluding Great Lakes)
Lakes and
reservoirs
Rivers and
streams
Types of Freshwater
Fished, Excluding
Great Lakes
Freshwater anglers fished in a
variety of waters. Most non-
Great Lakes freshwater anglers,
24.8 million (86 percent), fished
in flatwater including ponds,
lakes, or reservoirs on 361
million days. Rivers and streams
were utilized by 13.4 million
freshwater anglers (46 percent)
on 145 million days.
Great Lakes Anglers
Great Lakes fishing includes not
only the Great Lakes, but also
their tributaries, bodies of water
that connect the Great Lakes,
and the St. Lawrence River
south of the bridge at Cornwall.
The most popular of the lakes
among anglers was Lake Erie.
Thirty-seven percent of all the
Great Lakes anglers fished Lake
Erie on an average of 9 days
during 1996. Lake Michigan was
a close second in popularity.
Thirty-five percent enjoyed
fishing in Lake Michigan waters
with an average of 6 days per
angler recorded. Lake Huron
was fished by 14 percent of all
Great Lakes anglers. Anglers
fished Lake Huron an average of
7 days in 1996.
The tributaries to the lakes
attracted 10 percent of all Great
Lakes anglers. They averaged 12
days of fishing on these waters
in 1996. While Lake St. Clair
was fished by only 4 percent of
all Great Lakes anglers, these
participants fished an average of
14 days per year, more than any
other Great Lake or their con-necting
waters.
Great Lakes Fishing
Percentage
Anglers of all Great
(thousands) Lakes anglers
Total, all Great Lakes 2,039 100
Lake Erie 746 37
Lake Michigan 715 35
Lake Huron 279 14
Lake Ontario 260 13
Tributaries to the Great Lakes 205 10
Lake Superior 140 7
St. Lawrence River 95 5
Lake St. Clair 91 4
Source: Table 26
16
20%
9%
27%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Fished, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Fished, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
16%
21%
22%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
20%
15%
9%
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Sex
Men
73%
Women
27%
Women
Percent of Anglers, by Age
16 and 17
4%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
9%
25 to 34
20%
35 to 44
27%
55 to 64
10%
65 and
older
9%
Sex and Age of Anglers
While fishing was enjoyed by
more men than women in 1996,
a substantial number of women
fished as well. In 1996, 27
percent of American males
fished, while 9 percent of Ameri-can
females fished. Of the 35.2
million anglers who fished in the
U.S., 73 percent (25.7 million)
were male and 27 percent (9.5
million) were female.
Almost 10 million anglers, 27
percent of all anglers, were 35 to
44 years old, which is 22 percent
of the U.S. population in that age
group. They were followed by
7.2 million anglers 25 to 34
years old who comprised 20
percent of all anglers and had a
participation rate of 21 percent.
Next came the 45- to 54-year-old
age group, 7.0 million partici-pants
who accounted for 20
percent of all anglers. That age
group had a participation rate of
20 percent. The 3.5 million 55-
to 64-year-olds who fished,
comprised 10 percent of all
anglers and had a participation
rate of 15 percent. Anglers 18 to
24 years old numbered 3.3
million, 9 percent of total an-glers,
and recorded a 16 percent
participation rate. The 3.1
million anglers 65 years old and
older made up 9 percent of the
angler population, and had a
participation rate of 9 percent.
The 16- and 17-year-olds added
1.4 million individuals to the
angler population. They made
up only 4 percent for the total
angler population, but had a 20
percent participation rate.
Size of Residence
of Anglers
In 1996, 70 percent of U.S.
residents who fished lived inside
a Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA) with most anglers coming
from large MSA’s. People living
in MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more had a partici-pation
rate of 14 percent. Thirty-eight
percent of all anglers came
from these large urban areas.
Within MSA’s with populations of
250,000 to 999,999, 18 percent
of the total population enjoyed
fishing, representing 20 percent
of the angler population. In
Anglers, by Sex and Age
Total, both sexes 35.2 million
Male 25.7 million
Female 9.5 million
Total, all ages 35.2 million
16 and 17 1.4
18 to 24 3.3
25 to 34 7.2
35 to 44 9.7
45 to 54 7.0
55 to 64 3.5
65 and older 3.1
Source: Table 9
17
addition, MSA’s with populations
of 50,000 to 249,999 had a
participation rate of 21 percent;
they made up 11 percent of all
anglers. In areas outside of
MSA’s, 25 percent of the popula-tion
fished in 1996. These
participants made up 30 percent
of all anglers.
Income of Anglers
Anglers at all income levels
enjoyed fishing in 1996. Partici-pation
rates ranged from 9
percent for all individuals with
household incomes of $10,000
or less to 23 percent for those
who reported annual household
incomes of $40,000 to $49,999
and $50,000 to $74,999. Those
living in households with
incomes of $10,000 or less
comprised 4 percent of all
anglers; those with $50,000 to
$74,999 incomes made up 21
percent of all anglers; and those
with household incomes of
$40,000 to $49,999 comprised
12 percent of all anglers.
Twenty-one percent of the
individuals with household
earnings of $75,000 to $99,999
represented 9 percent of all
anglers. Persons with house-hold
earnings of $25,000 to
$29,999 had a participation rate
of 21 percent and comprised 8
percent of the angler population.
Another 8 percent of the angler
population had household
earnings of $100,000 or more,
and a 20 percent participation
rate. Anglers with household
incomes of $10,000 to $19,999
had a participation rate of 13
percent and made up 7 percent
of all anglers. Nineteen percent
of persons in households with
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999
represented 7 percent of all
anglers, as did persons in
households with incomes of
$35,000 to $39,999. However,
persons with household incomes
of $35,000 to $39,999 had a
participation rate of 22 percent,
while those within the $30,000 to
$34,999 income group had a
participation rate of 19 percent.
Finally 16 percent of all persons
in households earning $20,000
to $24,999 fished and made up
6 percent of the total angler
population in 1996. Twelve
percent of anglers did not report
their income.
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Residence
(Angler population: 35.2 million)
Outside
MSA
30%
Large
MSA
38%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Residence
(17% of total U.S. population fished)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
Medium
MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
14%
18%
21%
25%
Medium
MSA
20%
Small
MSA
11%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
9%
13%
16%
21%
19%
22%
23%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
23%
21%
20%
$100,000 or
more
18
10%
19%
11%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Education
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Race
White
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
9%
17%
18%
19%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
18%
19%
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
5%
Black
5%
Black
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Education
5 years or
more of
college
13%
12 years
36%
4 years
of college
14%
1 to 3 years
of college
24%
9 to 11 years
10%
8 years or
less
3%
White
90%
Other
Education and Race
of Anglers
People from a variety of educa-tional
backgrounds fished in
1996. The lowest participation
rate, 9 percent, was found
among those with 8 years of
education or less. They made
up 3 percent of all anglers. The
highest participation rate, 19
percent, was found among those
individuals with 1 to 3 years of
college, and those who had 5
years or more of college.
Those persons with 1 to 3 years
of college made up 24 percent
of all anglers, while those with
5 years or more made up
13 percent of all anglers. Those
persons who had 4 years of
college had a participation
rate of 18 percent, which repre-sented
14 percent of all anglers,
while individuals with 12 years
of education made up 36 per-cent
of all anglers. They, too,
had a participation rate of 18
percent. Finally, those with
9 to 11 years of education had a
participation rate of 17 percent,
which represented 10 percent of
all anglers.
Participation rates among
people of different races varied.
Nineteen percent of the White
population fished, compared
with 10 percent of the Black
population and 11 percent of
other races. Among anglers, 90
percent of the total were White,
5 percent were Black, and 5
percent were other races.
Angler, by Education
and Race
(In millions)
Total anglers 35.2
Education
0-8 1.1
9-11 3.6
12 years 12.6
1-3 years college 8.6
4 years 5.0
5 years or more college 4.5
Race
White 31.8
Black 1.8
Other 1.7
Source: Table 9
19
1991-1996 Comparison
of Fishing Activity
The number of people fishing in
the United States is roughly the
same for the last two National
Survey years, but their number
of fishing days and expenditures
for fishing have increased sub-stantially.
The number of fishing
days increased 22 percent and
the fishing expenditures in-creased
37 percent.
The number of anglers in fresh-water
and saltwater did not
change (at the 95 percent
confidence level), although the
number of Great Lakes anglers
decreased 20 percent. The
amount of activity of the anglers
increased, with freshwater days
up 17 percent and saltwater
days up more than twice the
freshwater rate, 38 percent.
Fishing expenditures increased
for both the trip-related and
equipment categories. Trip-related
expenditures went
up 13 percent and the equip-ment
expenditures increased
78 percent. The purchase of
special equipment such as
boats and campers more than
doubled, increasing 123 percent.
Expenditures for fishing equip-ment,
such as rods and reels,
increased 23 percent.
Number of Anglers*
(Millions)
35.6 35.2
511
626
$27.6
$37.8
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of Fishing
(Millions)
Fishing
Expenditures
(Billions)
*The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Anglers, Total .......................................................... 35.6 100 35.2 100 -1*
All freshwater ........................................................ 31.0 87 29.7 84 -4*
Freshwater, except Great Lakes ....................... 30.2 85 28.9 82 -4*
Great Lakes....................................................... 2.6 7 2.0 6 -20
Saltwater ............................................................... 8.9 25 9.4 27 6*
Days, Total ............................................................... 511 100 626 100 22
All freshwater ........................................................ 440 86 515 82 17
Freshwater, except Great Lakes ....................... 431 84 485 78 13
Great Lakes....................................................... 25 5 20 3 -21*
Saltwater ............................................................... 75 15 103 17 38
Fishing Expenditures, Total** ................................ $27,589 100 $37,673 100 37
Trip-related ............................................................ 13,625 49 15,257 40 12
Equipment ............................................................ 10,770 39 19,174 51 78
Fishing equipment............................................. 4,301 16 5,309 14 23
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 712 3 1,037 3 46
Special equipment ............................................ 5,756 21 12,828 34 123
Other ..................................................................... 3,194 12 3,235 9 1*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for one survey
year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure totals. Excludes expenditures for heating
and cooking fuel because 1991 Survey did not collect this information.
21
Hunting
22
Hunting
Highlights
In 1996, 14 million people,
16 years old and older, enjoyed
hunting a variety of game ani-mals
within the United States.
They hunted 257 million days
and took 223 million trips.
Their expenditures totaled
$20.6 billion.
In 1996, 11.3 million hunters
pursued big game such as deer
and elk on 154 million days.
They spent $9.7 billion on trips
and equipment during the year.
A total of 6.9 million people
hunted small game including
squirrels and rabbits. They
hunted small game on 75 million
days and spent $2.5 billion on
their hunting trips and equip-ment.
Migratory bird hunters
numbered 3.1 million. They
spent 27 million days hunting
birds such as waterfowl and
dove. Their trip and equipment
expenditures totaled $1.3 billion.
Other animals, such as raccoons
and groundhogs, were sought by
1.5 million hunters on 25 million
days. These hunters spent $433
million on trips and equipment
for the year.
Total Hunting
(In millions)
Total Hunters
Big game
Small game
Migratory bird
Other animals
Days Trips
14.0
11.3
6.9
25 23
154
114
257
223
Hunters
Scale enlarged to show detail. Detail of days does not add to total
because of multiple responses.
3.1
1.5
75
27
64
23
23
Hunting Expenditures
Of the $ 20.6 billion spent
by hunters in 1996, 25 percent,
$5.2 billion, was spent on
trip-related expenses. Food and
lodging totaled $2.5 billion, 49
percent of all trip-related ex-penses.
Transportation cost
hunters $1.8 billion, 35 percent
of their trip-related expenditures.
Other trip-related expenses such
as guide fees, land use fees, and
equipment rental were $864
million or 17 percent of all trip-related
expenses.
Total hunting equipment expen-ditures
were $11.3 billion in
1996, 55 percent of all hunting
expenses. Hunting equipment,
such as guns and rifles, tele-scopic
sights, and ammunition,
cost hunters $5.5 billion, 49
percent of all equipment costs.
Expenditures for auxiliary equip-ment,
including camping equip-ment,
binoculars, and special
hunting clothing, accounted for
$1.2 billion or 11 percent of all
equipment expenses. Special
equipment, such as campers or
trail bikes, amounted to $4.5
billion or 40 percent of all
equipment expenditures.
Hunters spent $355 million on
magazines, books, membership
dues and contributions, 2 per-cent
of total expenses. Land
leasing and ownership expendi-tures
totaled $3.2 billion, 15
percent of the total.
Total Hunting
Hunters 14.0 million
Big game 11.3 million
Small game 6.9 million
Migratory bird 3.1 million
Other animals 1.5 million
Days 257 million
Big game 154 million
Small game 75 million
Migratory bird 27 million
Other animals 25 million
Trips 223 million
Big game 114 million
Small game 64 million
Migratory bird 23 million
Other animals 23 million
Expenditures $20.6 billion
Big game 9.7 billion
Small game 2.5 billion
Migratory bird 1.3 billion
Other animals 0.4 billion
Unspecified 6.7 billion
Detail does not add to total
because of multiple responses
and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1 and 17-21
Total Hunting Expenditures
Total hunting expenditures $20.6 billion
Total trip-related $ 5.2 billion
Food and lodging 2.5 billion
Transportation 1.8 billion
Other trip costs 0.9 billion
Total equipment expenditures $11.3 billion
Hunting equipment 5.5 billion
Auxiliary equipment 1.2 billion
Special equipment 4.5 billion
Total other hunting expenditures $4.1 billion
Magazines, books 0.1 billion
Membership dues and contributions 0.2 billion
Land leasing and ownership 3.2 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits 0.7 billion
Source: Table 17
Expenditures
(Total expenditures $20.6 billion)
Percent of Total
Hunting Expenditures
(Total expenditures $20.6 billion)
Other animals
$0.4 billion
Migratory bird
$1.3 billion
Small game
$2.5 billion
Other
20%
Equipment
55%
Trip-related
25%
Unspecified
$6.7 billion
Big game
$9.7 billion
24
Big Game Hunting Trip and
Equipment Exenditures
(Total expenditures $9.7 billion)
Equipment $6.5
billion
Trip-related $3.2
billion
Small Game Hunting Trip and
Equipment Exenditures
(Total expenditures $2.5 billion)
Equipment $1.3
billion
Trip-related $1.2
billion
Big Game Hunting
In 1996, 11.3 million hunters
devoted 154 million days to
hunting big game including deer,
elk, bear, and wild turkey. They
took 114 million trips. Each
hunter spent an average of 14
days hunting big game in 1996.
Trip and equipment expenditures
for big game hunters amounted
to $9.7 billion. Trip-related
expenses totaled $3.2 billion. Of
that amount, food and lodging
totaled $1.6 billion or 49 percent
of the trip-related costs. Trans-portation
costs were $1.0 billion
for big game hunters, 32 percent
of trip-associated costs. Other
trip-related expenses amounted
to $585 million, or 18 percent of
trip costs.
Big game hunters spent $6.5
billion on equipment. Hunting
equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.) accounted for $2.6 billion.
Purchases of auxiliary equip-ment
(camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.) totaled $847
million. And special equipment
(vans, trail bikes, etc.) cost big
game hunters $3.1 billion.
Small Game Hunting
On a total of 75 million days
in 1996, 6.9 million hunters
pursued small game such as
rabbits, squirrel, pheasants,
quail, and grouse. They took
64 million trips. Small game
sportsmen averaged 11 days
in the field hunting.
Small game hunters spent $2.5
billion on trips and equipment in
1996. Of the $1.2 billion spent
on trip-related costs, $595
million, or 50 percent of all small
game trip-related costs, were
spent on food and lodging.
Transportation costs accounted
for $450 million or 38 percent of
small game trip expenses. Other
trip-related expenditures contrib-uted
$147 million or 12 percent
to the total spent on small game
hunting trips.
Small game equipment expendi-tures
totaled $1.3 billion. Spe-cifically,
purchases of hunting
equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.) accounted for $965 million
spent by small game hunters
during the year. Auxiliary equip-ment
(camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.) cost $62 million,
and special equipment (vans,
trail bikes, etc.) cost small game
hunters $262 million for the year.
Big Game
Hunters 11.3 million
Days 154 million
Trips 114 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $9.7 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 18
Small Game
Hunters 6.9 million
Days 75 million
Trips 64 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $2.5 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 19
25
Migratory Bird Hunting
In 1996, 3.1 million migratory
bird hunters devoted 27 million
days on 23 million trips for
hunting birds such as doves,
ducks, and geese. Migratory
bird hunters spent an average of
9 days hunting for the year.
The $1.3 billion spent by migra-tory
bird hunters in 1996 was
spent on hunting trips and
equipment. Of the items contrib-uting
to this sum, $576 million
was spent on trip-related ex-penses.
A further breakdown
reveals food and lodging cost
migratory bird hunters $263
million, or 46 percent of trip-related
expenses; transportation
accounted for $196 million, or 34
percent of all trip costs. Other
trip expenses amounted to $116
million making up 20 percent of
the total trip-related expendi-tures
for migratory bird hunters.
Migratory bird hunters pur-chased
$720 million worth of
equipment in 1996. They spent
$503 million on hunting equip-ment
(guns, ammunition, etc.).
Another $82 million was spent
by migratory bird hunters on
auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.),
and $135 million was spent on
special equipment (vans, trail
bikes, etc.).
Hunting Other Animals
During 1996, 1.5 million hunters
reported spending 25 million
days on 23 million trips pursuing
other animals such as ground-hogs,
raccoons, foxes, and
coyotes. They averaged 16 days
of hunting in 1996.
Overall, they spent $433 million
in 1996 on trips and equipment.
Trip-related costs totaled $211
million. Of that, food and lodging
cost $86 million or 41 percent of
trip-related costs; transportation
was $110 million, 52 percent
percent of trip-related expenses;
and other trip expenses were
$14 million, 7 percent of trip-related
costs.
Equipment expenditures for
hunting other animals totaled
$222 million in 1996. Hunters
pursuing other animals spent
$117 million on hunting equip-ment
(guns, ammunition, etc.),
and $10 million on auxiliary
equipment (camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.).
Migratory Bird
Hunters 3.1 million
Days 27 million
Trips 23 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $1.3 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 20
Other Animals
Hunters 1.5 million
Days 25 million
Trips 23 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $433 million
Source: Tables 1 and 21
Migratory Bird Hunting Trip and
Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures $1.3 million)
Equipment
$720
million
Trip-related $576
million
Trip and Equipment Expenditures for
Hunting Other Animals
(Total expenditures $433 million)
Equipment
$222
million
Trip-related $211
million
26
Comparative
Hunting Highlights
In 1996, big game hunters
averaged 14 days of hunting and
10 trips per hunter. Small game
hunters spent an average of 11
days hunting in the field on an
average of 9 trips. In compari-son,
migratory bird hunters
spent an average of 9 days and
7 trips hunting. Those partici-pants
hunting other animals
averaged 16 days and 15 trips
pursuing their game.
On average, big game hunters
spent more money on trips and
equipment than other hunters in
1996. They averaged $860 per
hunter for the year. Small game
hunters spent an average of
$357 per hunter during 1996.
Migratory bird hunters averaged
$422, and those hunting other
animals spent $284 per hunter
for the year.
In 1996, trip expenditures for all
hunting averaged $369 per
hunter for the year, a daily
average of $20. The average for
trip expenditures per hunter
varied by type of hunting. Ex-penditures
for big game hunting
trips averaged $281 per hunter
for lodging, food, transportation
and other trip-related expenses
for the year ($21 per day). Small
game hunters spent $172 on
average for their annual hunting
trip expenses ($16 per day).
Persons taking trips for migratory
bird hunting spent an average of
$187 ($22 per day) while trip
expenditures for hunting other
animals averaged $139 per
hunter for the year ($9 per day).
Hunting for
Selected Game
For big game hunters, deer was
the most popular draw among
10.7 million hunters on 131
million days. The 959 thousand
hunters who hunted elk went out
on 7 million days. While bear
attracted 405 thousand hunters
on 3 million days, wild turkey
drew 2.2 million hunters on 19
million days. In addition, 513
thousand hunters spent 5.5
million days hunting other big
game animals.
In 1996, approximately 3.1
million small game hunters
hunted rabbits and hares on 29
Comparative
Hunting, by Type
of Hunting
Days per
hunter
Trips per
hunter
Trip
expenditures
per hunter
Trip
expenditures
per day
18
14
11
9
16
$369
$281
$172
$139
$20
$21
$16
16
10
9
$187
Total
Big game
Small game
Migratory bird
Other animals
7
15
$22
$9
Hunting for Selected Game
(In millions)
Type of hunting Hunters Days
Big game 11.3 154
Deer 10.7 131
Wild turkey 2.2 19
Elk 1.0 7
Bear 0.4 3
Small game 6.9 75
Squirrels 3.2 25
Rabbits and hares 3.1 29
Pheasant 2.3 17
Quail 1.5 11
Grouse/prairie chicken 1.2 10
Migratory bird 3.1 27
Doves 1.6 8
Ducks 1.6 14
Geese 0.9 8
Other animals 1.5 25
Source: Table 7
27
Hunting Participation
(National participation rate: 7%)
West South
Central
8%
East South
Central
10%
South
Atlantic
6%
New
England
5%
Middle
Atlantic
5%
East
North
Central
8%
West North
Central
14%
Mountain
9%
Pacific
4%
million days. Quail was flushed
by 1.5 million hunters on 11
million days, while grouse and
prairie chicken were favorites of
1.2 million hunters on 10 million
days. Squirrels were hunted by
3.2 million participants on 25
million days. Pheasants at-tracted
2.3 million hunters on 17
million days. In addition, 447
thousand hunters spent 4.3
million days hunting other small
game animals.
Among those hunting migratory
birds, 8 million days were spent
by 1.6 million participants dove
hunting. Ducks were hunted by
1.6 million enthusiasts on 14
million days. On 8 million days,
915 thousand hunters hunted
geese in 1996. An additional
291 thousand sportsmen hunted
other migratory bird species on 2
million days.
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. The national
hunting participation rate was
7 percent.
Regionally, participation rates
ranged from 4 percent in the
Pacific Census Division to 14
percent in the West North Cen-tral
Division. The East North
Central, East South Central,
West South Central, and Moun-tain
Divisions all had participa-tion
rates above the national rate
of 7 percent. The East North
Central and West South Central
Divisions both had a participa-tion
rate of 8 percent. The East
South Central Division’s partici-pation
rate was 10 percent and
the Mountain Division recorded
a rate of 9 percent. The Middle
Atlantic and New England
Divisions recorded participation
rates of 5 percent, while the
South Atlantic Division disclosed
a participation rate of 6 percent.
Hunting in State of
Residence and in
Other States
An overwhelming majority
of participants hunted within
their state of residence, 13.3
million or 95 percent of all
hunters. Only 2.0 million,
14 percent, hunted in another
state. Percentages do not add
to 100 because those sportsmen
who hunted both in-state and
out-of-state were included in
both categories.
28
In 1996, 10.8 million big game
hunters, 95 percent of all big
game hunters, hunted within
their state of residence, while
only 12 percent, 1.4 million
people, traveled to another state
to hunt big game. Likewise, 95
percent of all small game hunt-ers,
6.6 million hunters, pursued
game in their resident state.
Eleven percent, 737 thousand,
ventured across state lines to
hunt small game. Ninety-four
percent of all migratory bird
hunters, 2.9 million participants,
hunted within their resident
state. Eleven percent or 323
thousand of these sportsmen
hunted out-of-state. Among
sportsmen who hunted other
animals, 95 percent, 1.5 million,
hunted in-state and 9 percent,
140 thousand participants,
hunted out-of-state.
Hunting on Public and
Private Lands
In 1996, 14 million hunters 16
years old and older hunted on
public land, private land, or both.
Some hunters, 2.3 million, 17
percent, used publicly owned
lands exclusively. Those hunters
who hunted only on private land
numbered 7.2 million, 51 per-cent.
Slightly over 4 million
hunters, 30 percent, hunted on
both public and private lands.
Over 6.5 million, 47 percent,
hunted on publicly owned lands
compared to 11.4 million, 81
percent, who hunted on privately
owned land.
In 1996, 6.5 million hunters used
public lands on 77 million days,
30 percent of all hunting days.
Forty-four percent of big game
hunters spent 43 million days on
public lands. Among the 6.9
million small game hunters, 38
percent used public land on 20
million days. Approximately 1.1
million migratory bird hunters, 36
percent of all migratory bird
hunters, spent 7.8 million days
on public lands. Of the partici-pants
who hunted other animals
in 1996, 394 thousand, 26
percent pursued their game on
public lands on 6 million days.
In contrast, 11.4 million
hunters spent 198 million
days, 77 percent of all hunting
days, pursuing their sport on
private lands in 1996. Seventy-seven
percent of big game
hunters, 82 percent of small
game hunters, 77 percent of
migratory bird hunters, and 86
percent of hunters pursuing
other animals spent time
hunting on private lands.
People Hunting on Public
and Private Lands
Public only
17%
Private only
51%
Public and
private
30%
Unspecified
2%
Percent of All Hunting, in State of
Residence and Other States
(Total: 14.0 million participants)
In other
states only
5%
In state of
residence
only
86%
In state of
residence
and in
other states
9%
Hunting in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
In-state Out-of-state
All hunters 13.3 2.0
Big game 10.8 1.4
Small game 6.6 0.7
Migratory bird 2.9 0.3
Other animals 1.5 0.1
Source: Table 6
29
9%
1%
13%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Hunted, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Hunted, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
7%
8%
9%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
8%
6%
3%
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Sex
Men
91%
Women
9%
Women
Percent of Hunters, by Age
16 and 17
5%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
10%
25 to 34
20%
35 to 44
27%
55 to 64
11%
65 and
older
7%
Days spent hunting on private
land also varied by type of
hunting. In 1996, big game
hunters spent 69 percent (106
million days) of their total hunt-ing
days on private lands; small
game hunters spent 73 percent
(55 million days) of their hunting
days on private lands; and
migratory bird hunters spent 67
percent (18 million days) of their
hunting days on private lands.
Persons hunting other animals
spent 81 percent (20 million
days) of their hunting days on
private lands.
Sex and Age of Hunters
Of the U.S. population 16 years
old and older, 13 percent of the
males and 1 percent of the
females enjoyed hunting in
1996. Of the 14 million partici-pants
who hunted in 1996, 91
percent (12.8 million) were
male and 9 percent (1.2 million)
were female.
Hunter participation was seen in
all age groups around the
country. The proportion of
hunters by age group ranged
from 5 percent among hunters
16 and 17 years old to 27 per-cent
for those hunters 35 to 44
years old. Nine percent of the
age group 16 and 17 years old
hunted in 1996. They numbered
672 thousand hunters. The
participation rate for 35- to 44-
year olds also was 9 percent, but
they numbered 3.8 million
hunters. Eight percent of all
persons 25 to 34 years old
hunted. They numbered 2.8
million hunters, 20 percent of all
hunters. Another 20 percent of
hunters, 2.9 million people, were
45 to 54 years old. Their partici-pation
rate was 8 percent.
Hunters 55 to 64 years old
numbered 1.5 million and repre-sented
6 percent of the general
population 55 to 64 years old
and 11 percent of all hunters. In
the 18- to 24-year-old group, 1.4
million hunters made up 10
percent of all hunters. That age
group had a participation rate of
7 percent. Finally, 967 thousand
people 65 years old and older
made up 7 percent of all hunters.
This age group had a participa-tion
rate of 3 percent for hunting
in 1996.
Hunters, by Sex and Age
Total, both sexes 14.0 million
Male 12.8 million
Female 1.2 million
Total, all ages
16 and 17 0.7 million
18 to 24 1.4 million
25 to 34 2.8 million
35 to 44 3.8 million
45 to 54 2.9 million
55 to 64 1.5 million
65 and older 1.0 million
Source: Table 10
30
Size of Residence
of Hunters
While most hunters were from
areas outside heavily populated
Metropolitan Statistical Areas
(MSA), a substantial number of
people living in large MSA’s also
enjoyed hunting. Twenty-four
percent of all hunters were from
MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more. Three
percent of the total residents of
these large MSA’s hunted. For
MSA’s with populations of
250,000 to 999,999, 7 percent of
the population hunted; they
comprised 19 percent of all
hunters. Nine percent of all
residents of MSA’s with popula-tions
of 50,000 to 249,999
hunted in 1996. Thirteen
percent of all hunters resided in
these areas.
Although 21 percent of the U.S.
population 16 years of age and
older resided in areas outside
MSA’s in 1996, 44 percent of all
hunters lived outside MSA’s.
Fifteen percent of all people
living outside MSA’s hunted in
1996 in contrast with 5 percent
of all people living inside MSA’s
who hunted.
Income of Hunters
Participation rates among
hunters with different annual
household incomes varied from
3 percent of persons living in
households earning less than
$10,000 a year (3 percent of all
hunters came from these house-holds)
to 10 percent of those
persons living in households
reporting incomes of $40,000 to
$49,999 (13 percent of all
hunters came from these house-holds).
Five percent of the
persons in households reporting
incomes of $10,000 to $19,999
comprised 7 percent of all
hunters. Six percent of the
nation’s population with house-hold
incomes of $20,000 to
$24,999 a year enjoyed hunting.
They made up 6 percent of all
hunters. Eight percent of all
people in households earning
$25,999 to $29,999 hunted.
They constituted 7 percent of all
hunters. In households reporting
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999,
9 percent was the participation
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Residence
(Hunter population: 14.0 million)
Outside
MSA
44%
Large
MSA
24%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Residence
(7% of total U.S. population hunted)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
Medium
MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
3%
7%
9%
25%
Medium
MSA
19%
Small
MSA
13%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
3%
5%
6%
8%
9%
9%
10%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
9%
8%
6%
$100,000 or
more
15%
31
2%
8%
3%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Education
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Hunted, by Race
White
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
4%
8%
8%
7%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
6%
6%
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
3%
Black
2%
Black
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Education
5 years or
more of
college
10%
12 years
41%
4 years
of college
12%
1 to 3 years
of college
22%
9 to 11 years
12%
8 years or
less
3%
White
95%
Other
rate. Residents of these house-holds
represented 8 percent of
all hunters. Nine percent of the
persons in households reporting
incomes of $35,000 to $39,999
totaled 7 percent of all hunters.
Nine percent of those in house-holds
earning $50,000 to
$74,999 represented 22 percent
of all hunters. In households
with incomes of $75,000 to
$99,999, 8 percent of the resi-dents
hunted. Persons in that
income bracket made up 8
percent of all hunters. Finally,
6 percent of those in households
earning $100,000 or more
per year enjoyed hunting and
contributed 6 percent to the
hunter population. Thirteen
percent of the sample did not
report their income.
Education and Race
of Hunters
People from a variety of educa-tional
backgrounds went hunting
in 1996. Participation rates
ranged from 8 percent among
those individuals with 9 to 12
years of school to 4 percent
among individuals with 8 years
or less of education. Those with
8 years or less of education
represented 3 percent of all
hunters. Those with 9 to 11
years of education represented
12 percent of all hunters and
those with 12 years of education
made up 41 percent of all hunt-ers.
Hunters with 1 to 3 years of
college made up 22 percent of
the hunter total, showing a 7
percent participation rate.
Twelve percent of all hunters had
4 years of college. Six percent
of all people in the U.S. with 4
years of college hunted in 1996.
Those with 5 years or more of
college represented 10 percent
of all hunters, and of that group,
6 percent participated.
While 7 percent of the U.S.
population went hunting in 1996,
participation among races
varied. Eight percent of the
nation’s White population
hunted, 2 percent of the Black
population hunted, and 3 per-cent
of the other races hunted.
Of the 14 million hunters, 95
percent were White, 2 percent
were Black, and 3 percent were
of other races.
Hunters, by Education and Race
Total hunters 14.0 million
Education
0 to 8 years 0.5 million
9 to 11 years 1.6 million
12 years 5.8 million
1 to 3 years of college 3.1 million
4 years of college 1.7 million
5 years or more
of college 1.3 million
Race
White 13.2 million
Black 0.3 million
Other 0.4 million
Source: Table 10
32
1991-1996 Comparison
of Hunting Activity
The number of people hunting in
the United States and their days
pursuing their sport are roughly
the same for the last two Na-tional
Survey years, but their
expenditures for hunting have
increased 45 percent. A robust
1996 economy after several
years of an economic downturn
can at least partly explain the
expenditure increase.
The number of hunters did not
change (at the 95 percent
confidence level) for any type of
hunting except small game
hunters, who decreased in
number by 9 percent. The level
of activity of the hunters as
measured by days in the field
significantly changed for big
game, which increased 20
percent, and migratory birds,
which increased 19 percent.
Hunting expenditures increased
for both the trip-related and
equipment categories. Trip-related
expenditures went up
30 percent and equipment
expenditures increased 90
percent. The purchase of special
equipment such as boats and
campers more than tripled,
increasing 215 percent. Expendi-tures
for hunting equipment such
as firearms and ammunition
increased 46 percent.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Hunters, Total .......................................................... 14.1 100 14.0 100 -1*
Big game............................................................... 10.7 76 11.3 81 5*
Small game ........................................................... 7.6 54 6.9 50 -9
Migratory bird ........................................................ 3.0 21 3.1 22 2*
Other animal ......................................................... 1.4 10 1.5 11 8*
Days, Total ............................................................... 236 100 257 100 9*
Big game............................................................... 128 54 154 60 20
Small game ........................................................... 77 33 75 29 -3*
Migratory bird ........................................................ 22 9 27 10 19
Other animal ......................................................... 19 8 25 10 27*
Hunting Expenditures, Total** ............................... $14,187 100 $20,329 100 43
Trip-related ............................................................ 3,957 28 4,871 24 23
Equipment ............................................................ 5,944 42 11,273 55 90
Hunting equipment ............................................ 3,776 27 5,519 27 46
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 731 5 1,233 6 69
Special equipment ............................................ 1,437 10 4,521 22 215
Other ..................................................................... 4,286 30 4,178 21 -3*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for the number
of dollars for one survey year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure estimates. Excludes expenditures for
boating costs and heating and cooking fuel because the 1991 Survey did not collect this information.
Number of Hunters*
(Millions)
14.1 14.0 236 257 $14.2
$20.3
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of Hunting*
(Millions)
Hunting
Expenditures
(Billions)
* The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
33
Wildlife
Watching
34
Wildlife-watching (formerly
called nonconsumptive) activities
including observing, feeding,
and photographing wildlife
continue to be popular in the
United States. These activities
are categorized here as being
either residential—within a mile
of one’s home—or nonresiden-tial,
at least 1 mile from home.
The 1996 Survey collected
information only on primary
wildlife-watching activities,
those activities whose main
objective was to observe, feed,
or photograph wildlife. Second-ary
or incidental participation
such as observing wildlife
while pleasure driving was not
included in the Survey.
In 1996, 62.9 million U.S. resi-dents,
31 percent of the U.S.
population 16 years old and
older, enjoyed a variety of
wildlife-watching activities.
People who took a primary
interest in wildlife around their
homes numbered 60.8 million,
while those who took trips away
from their homes for the primary
purpose of participating in
wildlife-watching recreation
numbered 23.7 million people.
Wildlife-
Watching
Highlights
Wildlife-Watching
Participants, by Activity
(In millions)
Total wildlife-watching 62.9
participants
Nonresidential 23.7
Observed wildlife 22.9
Photographed wildlife 12.0
Fed wildlife 10.0
Residential 60.8
Fed wildlife 54.1
Observed wildlife 44.1
Photographed wildlife 16.0
Maintained plantings 13.4
or natural areas
Visited public parks 11.0
or areas
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 35
Wildlife-Watching Participants
(In millions)
Total
62.9
(100%)
Residential
60.8
(97%)
23.7
(38%)
Nonresidential
35
Wildlife-Watching
Expenditures
In 1996, 84 percent of all pri-mary
wildlife-watching partici-pants
16 years old and older
spent $29.2 billion, an average
of $554 per spender. These
expenditures represented
29 percent of the total
amount spent for all wildlife-related
recreation.
In 1996, wildlife-watching partici-pants
spent $9.4 billion on trips
to pursue their activities. Food
and lodging accounted for $5.4
billion, transportation expenses
were $2.9 billion, and other trip
costs, such as land use fees and
equipment rental, were $1.1
billion for the year.
These recreationists purchased
$16.7 billion worth of equipment.
They spent $8.2 billion on
wildlife-watching equipment
including binoculars, film, bird
food, and special clothing.
Auxiliary equipment expendi-tures
for items such as tents and
backpacking equipment
amounted to $858 million for the
year. Participants spent $7.6
billion on special equipment
including off-road vehicles, trail
bikes, and boats.
For the year, wildlife-watching
participants also spent $395
million on magazines and books;
$862 million on membership
dues and contributions; $1.3
billion on land leasing and
ownership; and $537 million
on plantings.
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
Total wildlife-watching expenditures $29.2 billion
Total trip-related $9.4 billion
Food and lodging 5.4
Transportation 2.9
Other trip costs 1.1
Total equipment expenditures $16.7 billion
Wildlife-watching equipment 8.2
Auxiliary equipment 0.9
Special equipment 7.6
Total other expenditures $3.1 billion
Magazines, books 0.4
Membership dues and contributions 0.9
Land leasing and ownership 1.3
Plantings 0.5
Source: Table 40
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
(Total expenditures $29.2 billion)
Trip-Related Expenditures
(Total expenditures $9.4 billion)
Other
$3.1 billion
11%
Other trip-related
costs
$1.1 billion
12%
Lodging
$1.9 billion
20%
Trans-portation
$2.9 billion
31%
Equipment
$16.7 billion
57%
Trip-related
$9.4 billion
32%
Food
$3.4 billion
36%
36
Residential
Activities Highlights
Residential participants 16 years
old and older numbered 60.8
million in 1996, 97 percent of all
wildlife-watching recreationists.
The most popular residential
wildlife-watching activity,
feeding birds and other wildlife,
was enjoyed by 54.1 million
people, 89 percent of all
residential wildlife-watching
participants. Over 44 million
people observed wildlife in
1996, constituting 73 percent
of the residential participants.
Photographing wildlife was
enjoyed by over 16 million
people, or 26 percent of all
residential participants. Eleven
million people, 18 percent of all
residential participants, visited
public areas including parks
within one mile of their homes.
Approximately 9.2 million partici-pants,
15 percent of all residen-tial
participants, maintained
plantings for the primary pur-pose
of benefiting wildlife.
Finally, 7.9 million people, 13
percent of the residential partici-pants,
maintained natural areas
for the primary purpose of
benefiting wildlife.
Residential Participants
(In millions)
Total participants 60.8
Feed wild birds 52.2
Observe wildlife 44.1
Feed other wildlife 19.6
Photograph wildlife 16.0
Visit public areas 11.0
Maintain plantings 9.2
Maintain natural areas 7.9
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 37
Percent of Total Residential Participation, by Activity
(Total: 60.8 million participants)
Observe
26%
73%
86%
32%
13%
15%
18%
Feed Photograph
wild
birds
Feed
other
wildlife
Maintain
natural
areas
Maintain
plantings
Visit
public
areas
37
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed by
Residential Participants
Of the 44.1 million participants
who reported observing wildlife
around their homes, a large
majority, 42.2 million, observed
birds. Observing mammals was
popular among 38.5 million
participants. Insects and spiders
attracted the attention of 19.8
million people; 13.6 million
observed amphibians or reptiles;
and 11.1 million people reported
observing fish or other wildlife.
Of the 54.1 million residential
wildlife feeders in 1996, 96
percent fed birds. Over 52
million people fed birds an
average of eight months in 1996.
Approximately 19.6 million
participants fed other wildlife for
7 months, on average, during
the year.
More than 16 million residential
participants photographed
wildlife. Twenty-nine percent of
these photographers spent 2 to
3 days taking pictures of wildlife
during the year. Eight percent
(1.2 million) of the participants
spent 21 or more days photo-graphing
wildlife. Sixteen per-cent
(2.5 million) of the partici-pants
spent 1 day photographing
wildlife; 18 percent (2.9 million) 4
to 5 days; 18 percent (2.8 mil-lion)
6 to 10 days; and 11 per-cent
(1.7 million) 11 to 20 days.
96%
Percent of Residential
Wildlife Observers, by Type of
Wildlife Observed
(Total wildlife observers 44.1 million)
Birds
Mammals
Insects and
spiders
Reptiles and
amphibians
87%
45%
Fish and
other wildlife
31%
25%
Days Spent Photographing Wildlife
(Total participants: 16 million)
6-10 days
18%
1 day
16%
2-3
days
29%
11-20 days
11%
21 days
or more
8%
4-5 days
18%
38
Residential
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people
16 years old and older lived in
the United States. Of those
individuals, 30 percent ob-served,
fed, or photographed
wildlife around their homes.
The participation rates of these
residential participants varied
from region to region.
Residential wildlife-watching
participation rates ranged from
26 percent for residents in the
West South Central Division to
35 percent for those in the West
North Central and New England
Divisions. The New England,
East North Central, West North
Central, and Mountain Divisions
all had participation rates above
the national participation rate of
30 percent. The East North
Central Division’s participation
rate was 34 percent. The Moun-tain
Division followed with a
participation rate of 32 percent.
The participation rates for both
the South Atlantic and East
South Central Divisions were 30
percent. The Middle Atlantic and
Pacific Divisions both had
participation rates of 27 percent.
Wildlife-Watching Residential Participation
(National participation rate: 30%)
West South
Central
26%
East South
Central
30%
South
Atlantic
30%
New
England
35%
Middle
Atlantic
27%
East
North
Central
34%
West North
Central
35%
Mountain
32%
Pacific
27%
39
18%
31%
29%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Participated, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
15%
26%
34%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
34%
36%
32%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Sex
Men
46%
Women
54%
Women
Percent of Residential
Participants by Age
16 and 17
2%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
5%
25 to 34
15%
35 to 44
25%
55 to 64
14%
65 and
older
19%
Sex and Age of
Residential Participants
Residential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by males
and females in similar propor-tions.
In 1996, 29 percent of
American males 16 years
old and older enjoyed residential
activities, as did 31 percent
of American females of the
same age group. Of the
60.8 million residential wildlife-watching
participants, 46 per-cent
(28.1 million) were male
and 54 percent (32.7 million)
were female.
Of the 60.8 million residential
participants in 1996, 25 percent
or 15.3 million were 35 to 44
years old, and 20 percent or
12.3 million were 45 to 54 years
old. The participation rate for
residential wildlife-watching
recreation for both the 35- to 44-
year-old age group as well as for
the 45- to 54-year-olds was 34
percent. Participants 65 years
old and older numbered 11.4
million with a 32 percent
participation rate. They repre-sented
19 percent of all residen-tial
participants. Participants 25
to 34 years old numbered 9.2
million and represented 15
percent of all residential partici-pants.
Their participation rate
was 26 percent. There were 8.3
million participants in the 55- to
64-year-old age category, ac-counting
for 14 percent of all
residential recreationists and
having a participation rate of 36
percent. The 18- to 24-year-old
participants numbered 3.0
million, or 5 percent of the
residential participants. Their
participation rate was 15 percent
in 1996. Finally, the 16- and 17-
year-old participants totaled 1.2
million with a participation rate
of 18 percent, accounting for
2 percent of the residential
wildlife-watching participants.
Residential Participants,
by Sex and Age
(In millions)
Total, both sexes 60.8
Male 28.1
Female 32.7
Total, all ages 60.8
16 and 17 1.2
18 to 24 3.0
25 to 34 9.2
35 to 44 15.3
45 to 54 12.3
55 to 64 8.3
65 and older 11.4
Source: Table 42
40
Size of Residence of
Residential Participants
In 1996, 30 percent of all U.S.
residents 16 years old and older
participated in wildlife-watching
recreation around their homes.
Seventy-five percent of these
residential wildlife participants
lived in metropolitan areas of
various sizes. Participation rates
varied by population size of
metropolitan areas. People
living in Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (MSA’s) with populations
of 1,000,000 or more had a
participation rate of 27 percent.
These recreationists comprised
44 percent of the total residential
participants. In MSA’s of
250,000 to 999,999 the partici-pation
rate was 30 percent,
reflecting 20 percent of all
residential recreationists. Eleven
percent of the residential wildlife-watching
participants were from
MSA’s with populations of
50,000 to 249,999. The popula-tion
of these areas had a partici-pation
rate of 35 percent.
The highest participation rate
for residential wildlife-watching
participants was among persons
residing outside of MSA’s. While
21 percent of the total U.S.
population lived outside these
areas in 1996, they represented
25 percent of all residential
wildlife-watching participants.
Thirty-six percent of that
population group participated in
wildlife-watching activities
around their homes in 1996.
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Residence
(Total residential participants 60.8 million)
Large
MSA
44%
Small
MSA
11%
Medium
MSA
20%
Outside
MSA
25%
Percent of U.S. Population 16
Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Residence
(30% of total U.S. population participated)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
27%
30%
35%
36%
Medium MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
41
Income of Residential
Participants
Residential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by people
of all income levels. Participa-tion
rates ranged from 22 per-cent
among U.S. residents living
in households earning less than
$10,000 per year to 40 percent
among participants living in
households earning $75,000 to
$99,999 annually. These groups
represented 5 percent and 10
percent of all residential wildlife-watching
participants, respec-tively.
Participants in house-holds
earning $10,000 to
$19,999 a year had a participa-tion
rate of 26 percent and
constituted 8 percent of all
residential recreationists. The
participation rate among
recreationists with annual house-hold
incomes of $20,000 to
$24,999 was 28 percent, making
up 6 percent of all residential
participants. People with annual
household incomes of $25,000
to $29,999 participated at a rate
of 32 percent and made up 6
percent of all residential partici-pants.
Those people with annual
household incomes of $30,000
to $34,999, representing
6 percent of the residential
participants, had a participation
rate of 30 percent. Those
whose annual incomes totaled
$35,000 to $39,999 showed a
participation rate of 34 percent
while representing 6 percent
of all residential participants.
Persons from households with
incomes of $40,000 to $49,999
chalked up a participation rate
of 36 percent and represented
11 percent of all residential
participants. Among the 18
percent of residential partici-pants
who reported annual
household incomes of $50,000
to $74,999, the participation rate
was 34 percent. Finally, those
individuals with annual house-hold
incomes of $100,000 or
more reported a participation
rate of 37 percent, representing
8 percent of the of all residential
recreationists. Fourteen percent
of the residential wildlife-watching
sample did not
report their income.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
22%
26%
28%
32%
30%
34%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
36%
34%
40%
$100,000 or
more 37%
42
Education and Race of
Residential Participants
Among residential participants, a
wide range of educational
backgrounds was recorded. The
highest rate of participation was
found among recreationists with
5 years or more of college, 43
percent. They made up 16
percent of all residential wildlife-watching
participants. The
lowest participation rate, 16
percent, was among people with
8 years of education or less, 3
percent of all residential partici-pants.
The participation rate
among those with 9 to 11 years
of education was 23 percent.
They constituted 8 percent of all
residential participants. Resi-dential
recreationists with 12
years of education, 32 percent of
all residential participants, had a
participation rate of 27 percent.
Participants with 1 to 3 years of
college had a participation rate
of 32 percent, while those with 4
years of college had a participa-tion
rate of 35 percent in 1996.
Those groups represented 24
percent and 16 percent of all
residential wildlife-watching
participants, respectively.
A wide variety of participation
rates was found among the
different races. For the U.S.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Education
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
16%
23%
27%
32%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
35%
43%
5 years or
more of
college
16%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Education
12 years
32%
4 years
of college
16%
1 to 3 years
of college
24%
9 to 11 years
8%
8 years
or less
3%
43
Residential Participants,
by Education and Race
(In millions)
Total participants 60.8
Education
0 to 8 years 2.0
9 to 11 years 4.9
12 years 19.3
1 to 3 years of college 14.7
4 years of college 9.8
5 years or more of college 9.9
Race
White 56.6
Black 1.9
Other 2.2
Source: Table 42
10%
34%
15%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Race
White
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Race
Other
4%
Black
3%
Black
White
93%
Other
population, 34 percent of the
White population engaged in
residential wildlife-watching
activities, 10 percent of the
Black population enjoyed such
activities, and 15 percent of
individuals of other races partici-pated.
Of the total number of
residential participants, 93
percent were White, 3 percent
were Black, and 4 percent were
all other races.
44
51%
97%
42%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants, by Activity
Observe
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants in State of Residence
and Other States
In state of
residence and
in other states
19%
Photograph
In state of
residence
only
68%
Feed
Other states
only
13%
Nonresidential
Activities Highlights
In 1996, almost 24 million
people 16 years old and older
took trips away from home for
the primary purpose of observ-ing,
feeding, or photographing
wildlife. They constituted 38
percent of all wildlife-watching
participants. The most popular
nonresidential activity was
observing wildlife. Almost 23
million participants, 97 percent
of all nonresidential participants,
observed wildlife on an average
of 12 days during the year.
Photographing wildlife was
enjoyed by 12.0 million people,
51 percent of all nonresidential
participants, with an average of
7 days per participant. Nearly
10 million people fed wildlife
on an average of 9 days while
away from home. This consti-tuted
42 percent of all
nonresidential recreationists.
Eighty-seven percent of all
nonresidential participants took
trips within their state of resi-dence.
Sixty-eight percent of
the nonresidential participants
took trips only in their state of
residence, 19 percent took trips
both in their state of residence
and to another state, and 13
percent took trips only to other
states. Altogether, 32 percent of
nonresidential participants took
at least some of their trips to
other states.
Nonresidential
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Observers 22.9
Photographers 12.0
Feeders 10.0
Total days 314
Observing 279
Photographing 79
Feeding 90
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 36
45
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed by
Nonresidential
Participants
In 1996, many types of wildlife
were enjoyed by the 23.7 million
people who took trips for the
primary purpose of observing,
feeding, or photographing fish
and wildlife in the United States.
Birds attracted the attention of
the largest number of people,
17.7 million individuals, 75
percent of all nonresidential
participants 16 years old and
older. Over 14 million people
observed waterfowl on their trips.
Shorebirds such as herons and
pelicans were enjoyed by 9.5
million people. Almost 13 million
people observed songbirds; 10.6
million, birds of prey; and 6.5
million, other birds.
Land mammals such as
deer, bear, and coyotes drew
as much attention as birds.
Approximately 17.7 million
participants, 75 percent of all
nonresidential participants,
observed, fed, or photographed
land mammals. Fish attracted
the attention of 8.4 million
participants, 36 percent of all
nonresidential recreationists.
Almost 3.5 million people,
15 percent of all nonresidential
participants, observed, fed,
or photographed marine mam-mals
such as whales, seals,
and dolphins. Other wildlife
such as butterflies, snakes,
and turtles were of interest to
11.5 million nonresidential
participants, 49 percent of all
wildlife-watching participants.
Nonresidential
Participants, by Type of
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Birds, total 17.7
Waterfowl 14.3
Songbirds 12.9
Birds of prey 10.6
Shore birds 9.5
Other birds 6.5
Land mammals, total 17.7
Small land mammals 15.2
Large land mammals 13.2
Fish 8.4
Marine mammals 3.5
Other 11.5
(turtles, butterflies, etc.)
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 39
75%
75%
36%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants Who Observed,
Fed, or Photographed Wildlife
(Total participants: 23.7 million)
Birds
Land
mammals
Fish
15%
49%
Marine
mammals
Other (turtles,
butterflies, etc.)
46
Area or Site Visited
by Nonresidential
Participants
In 1996, both public and private
areas provided significant
opportunities for Americans to
enjoy wildlife-watching activities.
Approximately 8 million, or 34
percent of all nonresidential
participants, said they had
visited both public and private
areas during 1996. Many non-residential
participants, 12.0
million or 51 percent, reported
visiting only public areas to
enjoy their activities, while 2.4
million or 10 percent of nonresi-dential
participants visited only
private areas.
People also visited many differ-ent
types of wildlife habitat while
pursuing their activities during
1996. An estimated 18.3 million
people visited woodland habi-tats,
77 percent of the nonresi-dential
participants. Lakes and
streamsides also attracted a
large number of visitors, 16.3
million people or 69 percent of
the total. Brush-covered areas
and open fields attracted a
similar number of people, 14.1
million (59 percent), and 14.8
million (63 percent), respectively.
Wetlands were visited by 10.4
million, or 44 percent of all
nonresidential participants, and
manmade areas had 9.1 million
recreational visitors, 39 percent
of all nonresidential participants.
Oceanside areas were visited by
6.4 million people accounting for
27 percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Other types of
habitats accounted for 3.3
million nonresidential partici-pants,
14 percent of the total
nonresidential population.
Nonresidential
Participants, by
Site Visited
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Woodland 18.3
Lake or streamside 16.3
Open field 14.8
Brush-covered area 14.1
Wetland, marsh, swamp 10.4
Manmade area 9.1
Oceanside 6.4
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 38
69%
77%
63%
Type of Site Visited by
Nonresidential Participants
Woodland
Nonresidential Participants,
by Area Visited
Public and
private
34%
Lake or
streamside
Unspecified
5%
Open field
Private only
10%
Public only
51%
Brush-covered
area
Wetland,
marsh, swamp
Manmade
area
Oceanside
59%
44%
39%
27%
47
Nonresidential
Participants by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. Of those individu-als,
12 percent participated in
nonresidential activities.
Nonresidential participation
rates ranged from 9 percent in
the East South Central Division
to 16 percent in the Mountain
Division. Participants in the
Middle Atlantic and West South
Central Divisions had participa-tion
rates of 10 percent. Indi-viduals
in the South Atlantic
and Pacific Divisions recorded
participation rates of 11 percent.
The New England, East North
Central, and West North Central
Divisions all had participation
rates of 14 percent—above the
national participation rate of
12 percent.
Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participation
(National participation rate: 12%)
West South
Central
10% East South
Central
9%
South
Atlantic
11%
New
England
14%
Middle
Atlantic
10%
East
North
Central
14%
West North
Central
14%
Mountain
16%
Pacific
11%
48
Sex and Age of
Nonresidential
Participants
Nearly equal numbers of males
and females 16 years old and
older enjoyed nonresidential
wildlife-watching activities. In
1996, 12 percent of American
males and 11 percent of
American females enjoyed
observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
wildlife away from
home. Among the 23.7 million
nonresidential participants, 50
percent (11.7 million) were male,
and 50 percent (11.9 million)
were female.
The age group with the most
nonresidential participants,
6.9 million, was the 35- to 44-
year-olds who had a participa-tion
rate of 16 percent. This
group was closely followed by
the 5.3 million participants in the
45- to 54-year-old age group
whose participation rate was 15
percent. These two groups
represented 29 percent and 22
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively.
There were 4.6 million partici-pants
in the 25- to 34-year-old
age group, 19 percent of all non-residential
participants. Thirteen
percent of the people in this age
group participated in nonresi-dential
activities. The 55- to
64-year-old age group, which
had a participation rate of 11
percent, numbered 2.5 million
participants and represented 10
percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Six percent of
persons 65 years old and older
participated in nonresidential
Percent of Nonresidential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Sex
Men
50%
Women
50%
11%
12%
Percent of U.S. Population 16
Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Sex
Men
Women
Primary Nonresidential
Participants by Sex
and Age
Total, both sexes 23.7 million
Male 11.7 million
Female 11.9 million
Total, all ages 23.7 million
16 to 17 0.6 million
18 to 24 1.7 million
25 to 34 4.6 million
35 to 44 6.9 million
45 to 54 5.3 million
55 to 64 2.5 million
65 and older 2.1 million
Source: Table 41
49
activities. They represented 9
percent of all participants.
Participants 18 to 24 years
old numbered 1.7 million.
They accounted for 7 percent of
all nonresidential participants
and had a participation rate of 8
percent. Finally, persons 16 to
17 years old had a participation
rate of 9 percent. These 608
thousand individuals comprised
3 percent of all nonresidential
participants.
55 to 64
10%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants by Age
25 to 34
19%
45 to 54
22%
35 to 44
29%
18 to 24
7%
16 and 17
65 and 3%
over
9%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Participated, by Age
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
9%
8%
13%
16%
65 and older
45 to 54
55 to 64
15%
11%
6%
50
Size of Residence of
Nonresidential
Participants
Nonresidential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by a
substantial number of people
from both urban and rural areas.
In 1996, 11 percent of all per-sons
living in Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (MSA’s) took
trips primarily for the enjoyment
of wildlife. They comprised 75
percent of all nonresidential
participants. Those living in
MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more participated
at a rate of 11 percent and
represented 45 percent of all
nonresidential participants. The
participation rate for nonresiden-tial
recreationists in MSA’s with
populations of 250,000 to
999,999—20 percent of all
nonresidential participants—was
12 percent. MSA’s with popula-tions
of 50,000 to 249,999 had a
participation rate of 13 percent
and participants therein repre-sented
11 percent of all nonresi-dential
recreationists. Those
participants residing in areas
outside an MSA had a participa-tion
rate of 14 percent and
represented 25 percent of the
nonresidential total.
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants 16 Years Old and
Older, by Residence
(Total nonresidential participants: 23.7 million)
Small
MSA
11%
Large
MSA
45%
Outside
MSA
25%
Medium
MSA
20%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Residence
(12% of total U.S. population participated)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
11%
12%
13%
14%
Medium MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
51
Income of
Nonresidential
Participants
People from households at
all income levels enjoyed wild-life-
watching activities away
from home. Participation rates
ranged from 6 percent for those
in households earning less than
$10,000 per year (4 percent of
all nonresidential participants)
to 17 percent in those house-holds
earning $100,000 or
more annually (10 percent of
all nonresidential participants).
Following close behind this
income group were participants
from households earning
$50,000 to $74,999 and $75,000
to $99,999 per year with partici-pation
rates of 16 percent. They
represented 22 percent and 11
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively. Those
in the $35,000 to $39,999 and
$40,000 to $49,999 income
groups had a participation rate
of 14 percent, and constituted 6
percent and 11 percent of all
nonresidential participants,
respectively. Of those with an
annual household income of
$25,000 to $29,999, 13 percent
enjoyed nonresidential activities.
They represented 7 percent
of the nonresidential total.
Participants in the $30,000 to
$34,999 household income
group had a 12 percent partici-pation
rate, and represented
6 percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Lastly, individuals
with household earnings of
$10,000 to $19,999 or $20,000
to $24,999 recorded participa-tion
rates of 10 percent. They
represented 8 percent and 6
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively. Ten
percent of the nonresidential
wildlife-watching sample did
not report their income.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
6%
10%
10%
13%
12%
14%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
14%
16%
16%
$100,000 or
more 17%
52
Education and
Race of Nonresidential
Participants
People of all educational levels
participated in nonresidential
activities in 1996. Two percent of
the U.S. population with 8 years
of education or less participated
in a nonresidential wildlife-watching
activity, 1 percent of
the nonresidential total. In
comparison, 22 percent of the
population with 5 years or more
of college joined in nonresiden-tial
activities and represented 21
percent of all nonresidential
participants. The participation
rate of persons with 9 to 11
years of education was 7 per-cent.
These participants made
up 6 percent of all nonresidential
enthusiasts. Those with 12
years of education had a 9
percent participation rate and
represented 27 percent of the
nonresidential total. Participants
with 1 to 3 years of college
participated at a rate of 13
percent, contributing 26 percent
to the nonresidential total.
Lastly, 16 percent of those with 4
years of college participated in
nonresidential activities, making
up 18 percent of all nonresiden-tial
participants.
The participation rates among
races varied greatly. Thirteen
Nonresidential Participants, by
Education and Race
Total participants 23.7 million
Education
8 years or less 0.3 million
9 to 11 years 1.5 million
12 years 6.4 million
1 to 3 years of college 6.0 million
4 years of college 4.4 million
5 years or more of college 5.1 million
Race
White 22.1 million
Black 0.5 million
Other 1.1 million
Source: Table 41
5 years or
more of
college
21%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Education
12 years
4 years 27%
of college
18%
1 to 3 years
of college
26%
9 to 11 years
6%
8 years
or less
1%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Education
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
2%
7%
9%
13%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
16%
22%
53
percent of all White individuals
living in the U.S. participated in
nonresidential activities in 1996,
2 percent of all Black individuals
participated, and 7 percent of
individuals of other races partici-pated.
Of the total 23.7 million
nonresidential participants, 93
percent were White, 2 percent
were Black, and 5 percent were
other races.
2%
13%
7%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Race
White
Black
Other
Percent of Residential
Participants 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
5%
Black
2%
White
93%
54
1991-1996 Comparison
of Wildlife-Watching
Activity
The number of people observ-ing,
photographing, or feeding
wildlife in the United States in
1996 was substantially less than
in 1991. There were 17 percent
fewer people wildlife watching in
1996, with 18 percent fewer
residential participants and 21
percent fewer nonresidential
participants. However, the
number of days of nonresidential
wildlife watching did not change
(at the 95 percent confidence
level), and expenditures for
wildlife watching increased
21 percent.
The percentage of residential
participants that decreased the
most, 29 percent, were those
who visited public parks or other
public areas for the primary
purpose of observing, photo-graphing,
or feeding wildlife. The
number of 1996 residential
participants that did not change
relative to 1991 were those who
photographed wildlife and those
who maintained plantings or
natural areas.
All categories of nonresidential
participation decreased at least
15 percent in the number of
participants. The days of partici-pation
in nonresidential activities
did not decrease, however, when
compared at the 95 percent
confidence level.
Expenditures increased for the
equipment category, but not for
the trip-related category. Equip-ment
expenditures increased 35
percent. The purchase of auxil-iary
equipment such as tents
and backpacking equipment
increased 88 percent.
Number of Wildlife-
Watching Participants
(Millions)
76.1
62.9 342 314 $21.2
$25.7
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of
Nonresidential
Activity*
(Millions)
Wildlife-Watching
Expenditures
(Billions)
*The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Total wildlife watching ........................................... 76.1 100 62.9 100 -17
Residential ............................................................ 73.9 97 60.8 97 -18
Observe wildlife ................................................. 54.7 72 44.1 70 -21
Photograph wildlife ............................................ 17.0 22 16.0 25 -6*
Feed wild birds or other wildlife ......................... 65.4 86 54.1 86 -17
Visit public parks or areas ................................. 15.5 20 11.0 18 -29
Maint. Plantings or Natural Area ....................... 13.6 18 13.4 21 -1*
Nonresidential ....................................................... 30.0 39 23.7 38 -21
Observe Wildlife ................................................ 28.8 38 22.9 36 -21
Photograph Wildlife ........................................... 14.2 19 12.0 19 -15
Feed Wildlife ...................................................... 13.3 17 10.0 16 -25
Days, nonresidential ............................................. 342 100 314 100 -8*
Observing wildlife .............................................. 296 87 279 89 -6*
Photographing wildlife ....................................... 82 24 79 25 -3*
Feeding wildlife ................................................. 102 30 90 29 -12*
Total Wildlife-Watching Expenditure** ................. $21,242 100 $25,654 100 21
Trip-related ............................................................ 8,604 41 9,007 35 5*
Equipment ............................................................ 10,994 52 14,854 58 35
Wildlife-watching equipment ............................. 6,559 31 7,773 30 19*
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 402 2 755 3 88
Special equipment ............................................ 4,032 19 6,326 25 57*
Other ..................................................................... 1,643 8 1,793 7 9*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for one survey
year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure estimates. Excludes expenditures for
land lease and ownership, food for wildlife other than birds, boats and trip-related boating costs, cabins, and heating and cooking fuel
because the 1991 survey did not collect this information.
55
Tables
56
Guide to
Statistical
Tables
Purpose and
Coverage of Tables
The statistical tables of this
report were designed to meet
a wide range of needs for
those interested in knowing
about wildlife-related recreation.
Special terms used in these
tables are defined in
Appendix A.
The tables are based on re-sponses
to the 1996 Survey
which was designed to collect
data about participation in
wildlife-related recreation. To
have taken part in the Survey, a
respondent must have been a
U.S. resident (a resident of one
of the 50 states or the District of
Columbia). No one residing
outside the United States (in-cluding
U.S. citizens) was eli-gible
for interviewing. Therefore,
reported state and national
totals do not include participa-tion
by those who were not U.S.
residents or who were residing
outside the United States.
Comparability With
Previous Surveys
The numbers reported can be
compared with those in the 1991
Survey Reports. The methodol-ogy
used in 1996 was similar to
that used in 1991. These results
should not be directly compared
to results from Surveys earlier
than 1991 since there were
major change in meth

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

161616996
National Survfvf ey of
Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated
rRrRrRecrenenenation
U.S. Department of Commerce
William M. Daley, Secretary
Robert L. Mallet, Deputy Secretary
Economics and Statistics Administration
Lee Price, Acting Under Secretary
for Economic Affairs
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Martha Farnsworth Riche, Director
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Issued November 1997
FHW/96 NAT
As the Nation’s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most
of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of
our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural
values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through
outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure
their development in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major responsibil-ity
for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under U.S.
administration.
The mission of the Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish
and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is respon-sible
for national programs of vital importance to our natural resources, including administration of the
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration and the Federal Aid of Wildlife Restoration Programs. These two
grant programs provide financial assistance to the States for projects to enhance and protect fish and
wildlife resources and to assure their availability to the public for recreational purposes. Funds from the
administrative portion of these programs are used to pay for the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Suggested Citation
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau
of the Census. 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Economics and Statistics
Administration
Lee Price, Acting Under Secretary
for Economic Affairs
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Martha Farnesworth Riche, Director
Bradford R. Huther, Deputy Director
Nancy M. Gordon, Associate Director
for Demographic Programs
U.S. Department of Interior
Bruce Babbitt, Secretary
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Division of Federal Aid
Robert E. Lange, Jr., Chief
iii
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Foreword ................................................................................................................................................ vi
Survey Background and Method ............................................................................................................ vii
Highlights
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Summary................................................................................................................................................. 4
Fishing Highlights .................................................................................................................................... 8
Hunting Highlights ................................................................................................................................. 22
Wildlife-Watching Highlights ...................................................................................................................34
Tables
Guide to Statistical Tables ...................................................................................................................... 56
Fishing and Hunting Tables ....................................................................................................................58
Wildlife-Watching Tables ........................................................................................................................ 87
State Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 97
Appendices
A. Definitions .................................................................................................................................... A-2
B. Comparability With Previous Surveys ........................................................................................... B-2
C. Selected Data From Screening Interviews.................................................................................... C-2
D. Sample Design and Statistical Accuracy ...................................................................................... D-2
Contents
iv
Fishing and Hunting: 1996
1. Anglers and Hunters 16 Years Old and Older, Days of Participation, and Trips,
by Type of Fishing and Hunting ....................................................................................................... 58
2. Anglers, Trips, and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fishing .................................................................. 58
3. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish ..............................................................59
4. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish .............................................................59
5. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Fish ................................................................. 60
6. Hunters, Trips, and Days of Hunting, by Type of Hunting ................................................................ 60
7. Hunters and Days of Hunting, by Type of Game .............................................................................61
8. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters ........................................................................... 62
9. Selected Characteristics of Anglers, by Type of Fishing ................................................................. 64
10. Selected Characteristics of Hunters, by Type of Hunting ................................................................ 66
11. Summary of Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting ........................................................................ 68
12. Expenditures for Fishing .................................................................................................................69
13. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing ..............................................................70
14. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Freshwater Fishing, Except Great Lakes ............................. 71
15. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Great Lakes Fishing .............................................................72
16. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Saltwater Fishing ................................................................. 73
17. Expenditures for Hunting ................................................................................................................74
18. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Big Game Hunting ............................................................... 75
19. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Small Game Hunting ...........................................................76
20. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Migratory Bird Hunting ......................................................... 77
21. Trip and Equipment Expenditures for Hunting Other Animals ........................................................ 78
22. Special Equipment Expenditures for Fishing and Hunting ..............................................................79
23. Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses or Were Exempt ................................................... 79
24. Selected Characteristics of Anglers and Hunters Who Purchased Licenses .................................. 80
25. Freshwater Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Type of Water ............................................................81
26. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Fishing, by Great Lake ..............................................................81
27. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public and Private Land, by Type of Hunting .............................. 81
28. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Public Land, by Selected Characteristic ..................................... 82
29. Hunters and Days of Hunting on Private Land, by Selected Characteristic .................................... 83
30. Participation in Catch and Release Fishing, Ice Fishing, and Fly-Fishing ...................................... 84
31. Hunters Using Bows and Arrows, Muzzleloaders, and Other Primitive Firearms for Hunting ......... 84
32. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Fishing and Hunting ...................................... 85
33. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Fishing and Hunting ............................................... 85
34. Why Anglers and Hunters Did Not Participate More in 1996 .......................................................... 86
Wildlife-Watching Activities: 1996
35. Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Type of Activity .......................................................................... 87
36. Participants, Trips, and Days of Participation in Nonresidential (Away From Home)
Wildlife-Watching Activities ............................................................................................................. 87
37. Participation in Residential (Around the Home) Wildlife-Watching Activities .................................. 88
38. Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Area or Site Visited ...........................................89
List of Tables
v
39. Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participants, by Wildlife Observed,
Photographed, or Fed and Place .................................................................................................... 90
40. Expenditures for Wildlife Watching ..................................................................................................91
41. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activities .................. 92
42. Selected Characteristics of Participants in Residential Wildlife-Watching Activities ....................... 94
43. Land Owned or Leased for the Primary Purpose of Wildlife Watching ........................................... 96
44. Persons With Disabilities Who Participated in Wildlife Watching .................................................... 96
45. Participation of Wildlife-Watching Participants in Fishing and Hunting ........................................... 96
46. Participation of Sportsmen in Wildlife-Watching Activities ..............................................................96
State Wildlife-Related Recreation: 1996
47. Participants in Wildlife-Related Recreation, by Participant’s State of Residence ........................... 97
48. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation, by State Where Spending Took Place .................... 98
49. Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation, by Participant’s State of Residence ...................... 100
50. Anglers and Hunters, by Sportsman’s State of Residence ........................................................... 102
51. Anglers and Hunters, by State Where Fishing or Hunting Took Place ..........................................103
52. Hunters, by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place .............................................. 104
53. Days of Hunting, by State Where Hunting Took Place and Hunter’s State of Residence ............. 105
54. Days of Hunting, by Type of Hunting and State Where Hunting Took Place ................................. 106
55. Expenditures for Hunting, by State Where Spending Took Place ................................................. 107
56. Freshwater (Except Great Lakes) Anglers and Days of Fishing, by State Where Fishing
Took Place ...................................................................................................................................108
57. Great Lakes Anglers and Days of Great Lakes Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place .......109
58. Saltwater Anglers and Days of Saltwater Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place................ 109
59. Days of Fishing, by State Where Fishing Took Place and Angler’s State of Residence ............... 110
60. Expenditures for Fishing, by State Where Spending Took Place .................................................. 111
61. Participants in Wildlife-Watching Activities, by Participant’s State of Residence ..........................112
62. Participants in Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activities, by State Where Activity Took Place .. 113
63. Days of Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Activity, by State Where Activity Took Place
and Participant’s State of Residence ............................................................................................ 114
64. Expenditures for Wildlife-Watching Activities, by State Where Spending Took Place ................... 115
vi
Foreword Ours is a country with a rich
tradition of enjoying nature.
Whether casting a fly or snap-ping
a shutter, Americans find
wildlife-associated recreation a
source of lifelong enjoyment
and renewal.
The results of the 1996 National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation
reflect this national passion for
wild things and wild places.
Seventy-seven million Ameri-cans
16 years or older, or 40
percent of the adult population,
enjoyed some form of wildlife-related
recreation during 1996.
In doing so, they pumped $100
billion into the national economy,
supporting hundreds of thou-sands
of jobs.
The mission of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service is to con-serve
and enhance our nation’s
fish and wildlife and its habitat.
The Service works in partner-ship
with state wildlife agencies,
conservation organizations,
sportsmen’s groups, local
governments, corporations,
and individual citizens to
perform this mission.
For conservation efforts to
be effective, however, natural
resource managers need de-tailed
information on how people
use fish and wildlife resources.
The 1996 National Survey
of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation is
the most comprehensive survey
of its kind. It is an important tool
for natural resource profession-als
in planning and managing
these resources for the enjoy-ment
and benefit of all Ameri-cans.
The 1996 Survey was requested
by the States through the Inter-national
Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies. It is the
ninth in a series of surveys on
resource use by anglers, hunt-ers,
and those who enjoy ob-serving
wildlife. The Survey has
been sponsored by the Service
since 1955. It is financed by
hunters, anglers, and boaters
through excise taxes on sporting
arms, ammunition, fishing
equipment, and motorboat fuels
as authorized under the Federal
Aid in Sport Fish and Wildlife
Restoration Acts.
We can all be gratified that
wildlife-related recreation and
the conservation ethic that flows
from it remain strong in America.
Jamie Rappaport Clark, Director
Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Department of the Interior
vii
Survey
Background
and
Method
The National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation (Survey) has been
conducted since 1955 and is
one of the oldest and most
comprehensive continuing
recreation surveys. The purpose
of the Survey is to gather infor-mation
on the number of anglers,
hunters, and wildlife-watching
participants (formerly known as
primary nonconsumptive wildlife-related
participants) in the
United States. Information
also is collected on how often
these recreationists participate
and how much they spend on
their activities.
The planning process for the
1996 Survey began in 1994
when the International Associa-tion
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
(IAFWA) passed a resolution
asking the Fish and Wildlife
Service to conduct the ninth
National Survey of wildlife-related
recreation. Funding for
the Survey came from the ad-ministrative
portion of the Fed-eral
Aid in Sport Fish and Wild-life
Restoration Programs.
Consultations with State and
Federal agencies and nongov-ernmental
organizations such as
the Wildlife Management Insti-tute,
American Sportfishing
Association, B.A.S.S., Inc., Wild
Bird Feeding Institute, and
American Fisheries Society
started in early 1994 to ascertain
survey content. Other
sportsmen’s organizations and
conservation groups, industry
representatives, and researchers
also provided valuable advice on
questionnaire development, data
collection, and reporting.
Four regional technical commit-tees
were set up under the
auspices of the IAFWA to ensure
that State fish and wildlife
agencies had an opportunity to
participate in all phases of
survey planning and design.
The committees were made up
of agency representatives.
The Survey was conducted in
two phases by the U.S. Bureau
of Census for the Fish and
Wildlife Service. The first phase
was the screen which began in
April 1996. During the screening
phase, the Bureau of Census
interviewed a sample of 80,000
households nationwide, primarily
by telephone, to determine who
in the household had fished,
hunted, or engaged in wildlife-watching
activities in 1995, and
who had engaged or planned to
engage in those activities in
1996. In most cases, one adult
household member provided
information for all household
members. It is important to note
that the screen primarily covered
1995 activities while the next,
more in-depth phase covered
1996 activities. For more infor-mation
on the 1995 data, refer to
Appendix C.
The second phase of the Sur-vey
consisted of detailed inter-views
conducted about every
four months. The first interview
wave began in April 1996, the
second in September 1996, and
the last in January 1997. Inter-views
were conducted with
samples of likely anglers, hunt-ers,
and wildlife-watching partici-pants
who were identified in the
initial screening phase. These
interviews were conducted
viii
primarily by telephone, with in-person
interviews for those
respondents who could not be
reached by telephone. Respon-dents
in the second survey
phase were limited to those at
least 16 years old. Each respon-dent
provided information per-taining
only to his or her activi-ties
and expenditures. Sample
sizes were designed to provide
statistically reliable results at the
State level for fishing, hunting,
and wildlife-watching activities.
Altogether, interviews were
completed for 22,578 anglers
and hunters and 11,759 wildlife
watchers. More detailed infor-mation
on sampling procedures
and response rates is found in
Appendix D.
Comparability with
Previous Surveys
The 1996 Survey questions and
methodology were similar to
those used in the 1991 Survey.
Therefore, the 1996 estimates
are comparable to the 1991
estimates. The 1996 Survey
was the first to use computer-assisted
interviews which im-proved
the efficiency and timeli-ness
of data collection.
The methodology of the 1996
and 1991 Surveys did differ
significantly from the 1985 and
1980 Surveys, so their estimates
are not directly comparable to
those earlier surveys. The
changes in methodology in-cluded
reducing the recall
period over which respondents
had to remember their activities
and expenditures. Previous
Surveys used a 12-month
recall period which resulted in
greater reporting bias. Research
on recall bias found that the
amount of activity and expendi-tures
reported in 12-month
recall Surveys was over-esti-mated
in comparison with the
amount reported in shorter
recall periods.
The trends information pre-sented
in this report takes
the differences of the earlier
surveys into account in compar-ing
their estimates with those
of the 1996 and 1991 Surveys.
See the Summary Section and
Appendix B.
1
Highlights
2
Introduction The National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated
Recreation reports results from
interviews with U.S. residents
about their fishing, hunting, and
other fish- and wildlife-related
recreation. This report focuses
on 1996 participation and expen-ditures
of U.S. residents 16
years of age and older.
The numbers reported can be
compared with those in the 1991
Survey reports. The methodol-ogy
used in 1996 was similar to
that used in 1991. These results
should not be directly compared
with the results from Surveys
earlier than 1991 because of
changes in methodology. These
changes in methodology were
made in 1991 and 1996 to
improve accuracy in the informa-tion
provided. Trend information
from 1955 to 1985 is presented
in Appendix B.
The report also provides
information on participation in
wildlife-related recreation in
1995, particularly of persons
6 to 15 years of age. The 1995
information is provided in
Appendix C. Additional informa-tion
about the scope and cover-age
of the Survey can be found
in the Survey Background and
Method section of this report.
The remainder of this section
defines important terms used
in the Survey.
Wildlife-Associated
Recreation
Wildlife-associated recreation
includes fishing, hunting, and
wildlife-watching activities.
These categories are not mutu-ally
exclusive because many
individuals enjoyed fish and
wildlife in several ways in 1996.
Wildlife-associated recreation is
reported in two major categories:
(1) fishing and hunting, and (2)
wildlife watching (formerly
referred to as nonconsumptive
wildlife-related recreation).
Wildlife-watching includes
observing, photographing, and
feeding fish and wildlife.
Fishing and Hunting
This Survey reports information
about residents of the United
States who fished or hunted in
1996, regardless of whether they
were licensed. The fishing and
hunting sections of this report
are organized to report three
groups: (1) sportsmen, (2)
anglers, and (3) hunters.
Sportsmen
Sportsmen are persons who
fished or hunted. Individuals
who fished or hunted commer-cially
in 1996 are reported as
sportsmen only if they fished or
hunted for recreation. The
sportsmen group is composed of
the three subgroups in the
diagram below: (1) those who
Sportsmen
Anglers Hunters
Fished
and
hunted
Fished
only
Hunted
only
3
fished and hunted, (2) those
who only fished, and (3) those
who only hunted. The total
number of sportsmen is equal to
the sum of people who only
fished, only hunted, and both
hunted and fished. It is not the
sum of all anglers and all hunt-ers,
because those people who
both fished and hunted are
included in both the angler and
hunter population and would be
incorrectly counted twice.
Anglers
Anglers are sportsmen who only
fished plus those who fished and
hunted. The angler group
includes not only licensed hook
and line anglers, but also those
who have no license and those
who use special methods such
as fishing with spears. Three
types of fishing are reported: (1)
freshwater, excluding the Great
Lakes, (2) Great Lakes, and (3)
saltwater. Since many anglers
enjoyed more than one type of
fishing, the total number of
anglers is less than the sum of
the three types of fishing.
Hunters
Hunters are sportsmen who only
hunted plus those who hunted
and fished. The hunter group
includes not only licensed
hunters using common hunting
practices, but also those who
have no license and those who
engaged in hunting with a bow
and arrow, muzzleloader, other
primitive firearms, or a pistol or
handgun. Four types of hunting
are reported: (1) big game, (2)
small game, (3) migratory bird,
and (4) other animals. Since
many hunters enjoyed more than
one type of hunting, the sum of
hunters for big game, small
game, migratory bird, and other
animals exceeds the total num-ber
of hunters.
Wildlife-Watching
Activities
(formerly Nonconsumptive
Wildlife-Related Recreation)
Since 1980, the National Survey
of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-
Associated Recreation has
included information on wildlife-watching
activities in addition to
fishing and hunting. However,
the 1991 and 1996 Surveys,
unlike the 1980 and 1985 Sur-veys,
collected data only for
those activities where the pri-mary
purpose was wildlife
watching (observing, photo-graphing,
or feeding wildlife).
Secondary wildlife-watching
activities, such as incidentally
observing wildlife while pleasure
driving, are not included.
Many people, including sports-men,
enjoyed wildlife-related
recreation other than fishing or
hunting. We refer to these
nonharvesting activities, such as
observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
fish and other wildlife,
as wildlife-watching activities.
Two types of wildlife-watching
activity are reported: (1) non-residential
and (2) residential.
Because some people partici-pate
in more than one type of
wildlife-watching activity, the sum
of participants in each type will
be greater than the total number
of wildlife-watching participants.
Only those engaged in activities
whose primary purpose was
wildlife watching are included in
the Survey. The two types of
wildlife-watching activities are
defined below.
Nonresidential
This group included persons
who took trips or outings of at
least 1 mile for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
or photographing fish and
wildlife. Trips to fish or hunt
or scout and trips to zoos,
circuses, aquariums, and
museums were not considered
wildlife-watching activities.
Residential
This group included those whose
activities are within 1 mile of
home and involve one or more of
the following: (1) closely observ-ing
or trying to identify birds or
other wildlife; (2) photographing
wildlife; (3) feeding birds or other
wildlife on a regular basis; (4)
maintaining natural areas of at
least one-quarter acre where
benefit to wildlife is the primary
concern; (5) maintaining
plantings (shrubs, agricultural
crops, etc.) where benefit to
wildlife is the primary concern; or
(6) visiting public parks within 1
mile of home for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
or photographing wildlife.
4
Total Wildlife-Associated
Recreation
Participants 77 million
Expenditures $101 billion
Sportsmen
Total participants 39.7 million
Anglers 35.2 million
Hunters 14.0 million
Total days 883 million
Anglers 626 million
Hunters 257 million
Total expenditures $72 billion
Fishing $38 billion
Hunting $21 billion
Unspecified $14 billion
Wildlife Watching
Total participants 62.9 million
Residential 60.8 million
Nonresidential 23.7 million
Total expenditures $29 billion
Summary The Survey revealed that 77
million U.S. residents 16 years
old and older participated in
wildlife-related recreation activi-ties
in 1996. During that year,
35.2 million people fished, 14.0
million hunted, and 62.9 million
enjoyed at least one type of
wildlife-watching recreation
activity including observing,
feeding, or photographing fish
and other wildlife, in the
United States.
The information for participation
and expenditures of persons 16
years old and older is based on
estimates from the detailed
phase of the 1996 Survey. This
information is comparable with
estimates from the 1991 Survey,
but not with earlier ones because
of changes in methodology. A
complete explanation is provided
in Appendix B.
Persons 6 to 15 years old
were not included in the second
phase (detailed) interviews of
1996 participants. However, an
estimate of their participation
was calculated using data from
the 1991 and 1996 screening
surveys. Both screening sources
had nearly identical proportions
of 6- to 15- year-old participants
(9 percent for hunting; 22 per-cent
for fishing; and 16 percent
for wildlife-watching activity).
Based on these percentages,
there were 1.4 million hunters,
10.5 million anglers, and 12.0
million wildlife-watching partici-pants
6 to 15 years old in 1996.
More information on 6- to 15-
year-olds is provided in Appen-dix
C. For the rest of this report
all information pertains to partici-pants
16 years old and older,
unless otherwise indicated.
Among anglers, hunters, and
wildlife-watching participants,
there was a considerable overlap
in activities. In 1996, 68 percent
of the hunters also fished, and
27 percent of the anglers
hunted. In addition, 65 percent
of the anglers and 68 percent
of the hunters participated in
wildlife-watching activities, while
41 percent of all wildlife-watch-ing
participants reported hunting
and/or fishing during the year.
Expenditures associated with
wildlife-related recreation
totaled $101 billion in 1996.
5
Trip-related costs were $30.0
billion, while $60.4 billion was
spent on equipment and $10.8
billion was spent on other items.
Anglers spent a total of $37.8
billion, hunters $20.6 billion, and
wildlife-watching participants
$29.2 billion.
Fishing and Hunting
In 1996, 40 million U.S. residents
16 years old and older went
fishing and/or hunting. This
includes 35.2 million who fished
and 14 million who hunted. The
overage is accounted for by
those who both fished and
hunted, 9.5 million.
In 1996, expenditures by sports-men
totaled $71.9 billion. Trip-related
expenditures, including
those for food, lodging, and
transportation, were $20.5
billion, 29 percent of all fishing
and hunting expenditures.
Total equipment expenditures
amounted to $43.7 billion,
61 percent of the total. Other
expenditures such as those
for magazines, membership
dues, contributions, land
leasing and ownership, and
licenses, stamps, tags, and
permits accounted for $7.7
billion, or 11 pecent of all
sportsmen’s expenditures.
Wildlife-Watching
Recreation
Observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
wildlife was enjoyed by
62.9 million people 16 years old
and older in 1996. Among this
group, 23.7 million people took
trips for the primary purpose of
Other
$7.7 billion
11%
Equipment
$43.7 billion
Trip- 61%
related
$20.5 billion
29%
Sportsmen
unspecified
$13.5 billion
13%
Expenditures for Wildlife-Related Recreation
(Total expenditures $101.2 billion)
Fishing
$37.8 billion
37%
Other
$10.8 billion
11%
Equipment
$60.4 billion
Trip- 60%
related
$30.0 billion
30%
Wildlife-watching
$29.2 billion
29%
Hunting
$20.6 billion
20%
Expenditures by Sportsmen
(Total expenditures $71.9 billion)
Other
$3.1 billion
11%
Equipment
$16.7 billion
Trip- 57%
related
$9.4 billion
32%
Expenditures by Wildlife-
Watching Participants
(Total expenditures $29.2 billion)
enjoying wildlife, while 60.8
million stayed within a mile of
their homes to participate in
wildlife-watching activities.
In 1996, wildlife-watching partici-pants
spent $29.2 billion. Trip-related
expenses, including
food, lodging, and transportation,
totaled $9.4 billion, 32 percent
of the total expenditures. A total
of $16.7 billion was spent on
equipment, 57 percent of all
wildlife-watching expenses.
The remaining $3.1 billion,
11 percent of the total, was
spent on magazines, member-ship
dues, and contributions
made to conservation or
wildlife-related organizations.
6
1991 and 1996
Comparison
A comparison of estimates from
the 1991 and 1996 Surveys
show that millions of Americans
continue to enjoy wildlife-related
recreation. While participation in
fishing and hunting remained the
same, expenditures increased
significantly over that 5-year
period. In 1991, there were 35.6
million anglers and 14.1 million
hunters. In 1996, there were
35.2 million anglers and 14.0
million hunters. In 1996, anglers
spent 37 percent more and
hunters spent 45 percent more
than they did in 1991 for their
trips and equipment.
Although participation in wildlife
watching (observing, feeding,
and photographing wildlife)
decreased by 17 percent, from
76.1 million in 1991 to 62.9
million in 1996, expenditures for
trips and equipment increased
by 21 percent.
1955 to 1996 Findings
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service has conducted these
National Surveys at approximate
5-year intervals since 1955 (see
Appendix B). A 41-year trend
can be traced for the number of
anglers and hunters that partici-pated
in a given year. The
number of wildlife-watching
participants can be traced over
16 years because wildlife watch-ing
has been part of the Survey
only since 1980.
Trends show that the number of
anglers increased at over twice
the rate of the U.S. population
growth from 1955 to 1966. The
U.S. population increased by 62
percent while the fishing popula-tion
increased by 138 percent
during that period.
The number of hunters also
increased over the 41-year
period, but not at a rate equal
to the overall population growth.
The number of hunters in-creased
41 percent from 1955
to 1996.
The number of wildlife-watching
participants who took trips away
from home for the primary
purpose of observing, feeding,
Wildlife-Watching
Participants: 1980-1996
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons
between the wildlife-related recreation activities)
Index (1980=100)
Hunters and Anglers: 1955-1996
(Indices are used to simplify comparisons
between the wildlife-related recreation activities)
Index (1955=100)
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990/
1991
1996 1980 1985 1990/1991 1996
0
U.S. Population
Residential wildlife feeding
Total nonresidential
U.S. Population
Anglers
Hunters
0
50
100
150
200
250
50
100
150
200
250
or photographing wildlife de-creased
12 percent from 1980 to
1996. The number of people who
fed wildlife around their home
decreased by 21 percent.
This trend information is based
on published findings from the
1955 to the 1996 Survey reports
and unpublished screening
data from the 1985 to 1991
Surveys. As explained in Appen-dix
B, the estimates from the
published reports of the 1985
and 1991 Surveys are not
directly comparable due to
methodological changes.
7
Fishing
8
Total Fishing
(In millions)
Total anglers
Freshwater
Saltwater
Days Trips
35.2
29.7
9.4
103 87
515 420
626
507
Anglers
Scale enlarged to show detail. Detail does not add to total because
of multiple responses.
Fishing
Highlights
In 1996, 35.2 million U.S.
residents 16 years old and
older enjoyed a variety of
fishing opportunities throughout
the United States. Anglers
fished 626 million days and
took 507 million fishing trips.
They spent almost $38 billion
on fishing-related expenses
during the year. Among the
29.7 million freshwater angers,
including those who fished in
the Great Lakes, 515 million
days were spent and 420 million
trips were taken freshwater
fishing. Freshwater anglers
spent $24.5 billion on freshwater
fishing trips and equipment.
Saltwater fishing attracted 9.4
million anglers who enjoyed 87
million trips on 103 million days.
They spent $8.1 billion on their
trips and equipment.
Total Fishing
Anglers 35.2 million
Freshwater 29.7 million
Saltwater 9.4 million
Days 626 million
Freshwater 515 million
Saltwater 103 million
Trips 507 million
Freshwater 420 million
Saltwater 87 million
Expenditures $37.8 billion
Freshwater 24.5 billion
Saltwater 8.1 billion
Unspecified 5.2 billion
Source: Tables 1, 12, 13, and 16
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses and nonresponse.
9
Expenditures
(Total expenditures $37.8 billion)
Percent of Total Fishing Expenditures
(Total expenditures $37.8 billion)
Unspecified
$5.2 billion
Saltwater
$8.1 billion
Freshwater
$24.5 billion
Other
9%
Equipment
51%
Trip-related
41%
Fishing Expenditures
Anglers spent $37.8 billion in
1996 including $15.4 billion
spent on travel-related costs, 41
percent of all fishing expendi-tures.
Six billion dollars, 39
percent of all trip-related costs,
was spent on food and lodging,
and $3.7 billion, 24 percent of
trip-related expenditures, was
spent on transportation. Other
trip expenditures such as land
use fees, guide fees, equipment
rental, boating expenses, and
bait cost anglers $5.7 billion, 37
percent of all trip expenses.
Fishing equipment expenditures
totaled $19.2 billion in 1996, 51
percent of all fishing expendi-tures.
Anglers spent $5.3 billion
on fishing equipment such as
rods, reels, tackle boxes, depth
finders, and artificial lures and
flies. This amounted to 28
percent of all equipment expen-ditures.
Auxiliary equipment,
such as camping equipment,
binoculars, and special fishing
clothing, amounted to $1.0
billion, 5 percent of equipment
costs. Special equipment such
as boats, vans, and trail bikes
cost anglers $12.8 billion, 67
percent of all equipment costs.
Anglers also spent a consider-able
amount on land leasing and
ownership, $2.3 billion or 6
percent of all expenditures. They
spent $902 million on maga-zines,
books, membership dues
and contributions, licenses,
stamps, tags, and permits.
Total Fishing Expenditures
Total fishing expenditures $37.8 billion
Total trip-related $15.4 billion
Food and lodging 6.0 billion
Transportation 3.7 billion
Other trip costs 5.7 billion
Total equipment expenditures $19.2 billion
Fishing equipment 5.3 billion
Auxiliary equipment 1.0 billion
Special equipment 12.8 billion
Total other fishing expenditures 3.2 million
Magazines, books 0.2 billion
Membership dues and contribution 0.2 billion
Land leasing and ownership 2.3 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits 0.6 billion
Source: Table 12
10
Freshwater Trip and
Equipment Expenditures
Great Lakes
$1.4 billion
Freshwater,
except Great
Lakes
$22.4 billion
Freshwater Fishing
(In millions)
Freshwater
Anglers
Freshwater
Days
Freshwater
Trips
29.7 29.0
20 17
485 403
515
420
Total
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Detail does not add to total
because of multiple responses.
2.0
Freshwater
Fishing Highlights
Freshwater fishing was the most
popular type of fishing. In 1996,
29.7 million Americans fished
515 million days and took 420
million trips. Their expenditures
for trips and equipment totaled
$24.2 billion for the year. Ex-cluding
those who fished the
Great Lakes, freshwater anglers
numbered 29.0 million, 82
percent of all anglers. Freshwa-ter
anglers who did not fish the
Great Lakes took 403 million
trips on 485 million days and
spent $22.4 billion on trips and
equipment for an average of
$776 per angler.
The 2.0 million anglers who
fished the Great Lakes enjoyed
20 million days and 17 million
trips fishing. Their trip and
equipment expenditures,
$1.4 billion, were 7 percent
of the total freshwater trip
and equipment expenditures.
Great Lakes anglers averaged
$689 for the year.
Freshwater Fishing
Expenditures
Trip and equipment expendi-tures
for freshwater fishing
(excluding the Great Lakes)
totaled $22.4 billion in 1996.
Total trip-related expenditures
came to $10.0 billion. Food
and lodging amounted to
$4.1 billion, 41 percent of all
trip-related costs. Transportation
costs were $2.8 billion, 28
percent of all freshwater trip
costs. Other trip-related ex-penses
for anglers fishing
freshwater other than the Great
Lakes included guide fees,
equipment rental, and bait at
a cost of $3.2 billion.
Over $12.4 billion was spent
on equipment for freshwater
fishing, excluding the Great
Lakes. Non-Great Lakes fresh-water
anglers purchased $3.5
billion of fishing equipment such
as rods and reels, tackle boxes,
depth finders, and artificial lures
and flies. Expenditures for
auxiliary equipment including
Freshwater Fishing
Anglers 29.7 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 29.0 million
Great Lakes 2.0 million
Days 515 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 485 million
Great Lakes 20 million
Trips 420 million
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 403 million
Great Lakes 17 million
Trip and equipment expenditures $24.2 billion
Freshwater, except Great Lakes 22.4 billion
Great Lakes 1.4 billion
Detail does not add to total because of multiple responses
and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1, 13, 14, and 15
11
camping equipment and binocu-lars
totaled $692 million for the
year. Expenditures for special
equipment such as boats, vans,
and trail bikes accounted for
$8.2 billion.
Great Lakes anglers spent $1.4
billion on trips and equipment in
1996. Trip-related expenses
totaled $719 million. Of these
expenditures, almost $295
million was spent on food and
lodging, 41 percent of trip costs;
$141 million was spent on
transportation, 20 percent of trip
costs; and $283 million was
spent on other items such as
guide fees, equipment rental,
and bait, 39 percent of trip costs.
Great Lakes anglers spent
$686 million on equipment.
They bought $180 million worth
of fishing equipment (rods, reels,
etc.). They spent $35 million on
auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.)
and $471 million on the
purchase of special equipment
(boats, vans, etc.).
Saltwater Fishing
Highlights
In 1996, 9.4 million anglers
enjoyed saltwater fishing on 87
million trips totaling 103 million
days. Overall, they spent $8.1
billion during the year on trips
and equipment. Of their expen-ditures,
trip-related costs gar-nered
the largest portion, $4.6
billion. Food and lodging cost
$1.6 billion, 34 percent of trip
expenditures; transportation
costs totaled $824 million, or 18
percent of trip costs; and other
trip costs such as equipment
rental, bait, and guide fees were
$2.2 billion.
Saltwater anglers spent $3.4
billion on equipment. They spent
$1.1 billion on fishing equipment
(rods, reels, etc.), $138 million
on auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.), and
$2.2 billion on special equipment
(boats, vans, etc.)
Saltwater Fishing
Anglers 9.4 million
Days 103 million
Trips 87 million
Trips and equipment $8.1 billion
expenditures
Source: Tables 1 and 16
49%
Trip and Equipment
Expenditures
Trip-related
Equipment
Great Lakes Saltwater Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
51% 42% 55%
58%
45%
$1.4 billion
$8.1 billion
$22.4 billion
12
Comparative
Fishing by Type
of Fishing
Days per
angler
Trips per
angler
Trip
expenditures
per angler
Trip
expenditures
per day
18
17
10
11
14
$436
$346
$353
$25
$21
$36
$45
14
8
9
$492
All fishing
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes
Great Lakes
Saltwater
Comparative
Fishing Highlights
In 1996, anglers spent an aver-age
of 18 days fishing and took
an average of 14 fishing trips.
Freshwater, non-Great Lakes
anglers averaged 17 days fishing
and 14 trips. While Great Lakes
anglers averaged 10 days fishing
and 8 trips, saltwater anglers
fished an average of 11 days
and took an average of 9 trips.
Overall, anglers spent an aver-age
of $1,072 on fishing-related
expenses in 1996. They aver-aged
$436 per angler on trip-related
expenses, a daily aver-age
of $25.
Freshwater anglers, excluding
the Great Lakes, averaged $346
per participant in 1996 for trip-related
expenses, $21 per day.
Great Lakes anglers spent an
average of $353 on trip-related
expenses, $36 per day. Salt-water
anglers averaged $492 on
their trip expenditures and spent
an average of $45 per day.
Fishing for
Selected Fish
Of the 29.0 million anglers who
fished freshwater sources other
than the Great Lakes, 12.7
million spent 191 million days
fishing for black bass. Panfish
were sought by 8.0 million
anglers on 103 million days.
Catfish and bullheads drew 7.4
million anglers on 91 million
days. About 6.4 million anglers
fished for crappie on 91 million
days. Trout fishing attracted 9.0
million anglers on 94 million
days in 1996, and 4.8 million
anglers fished for white bass and
striped bass on 62 million days.
Freshwater anglers also com-monly
fished for walleye, sauger,
salmon, and steelhead.
In 1996, 2.0 million anglers
fished the Great Lakes. Walleye
and sauger attracted 724 thou-sand
anglers on nearly 6 million
days. Perch were fished for on
more than 5 million days by 624
Selected Fish by Type of Fishing
(In millions)
Type of Fishing Anglers Days
Freshwater, except Great Lakes
Black bass 12.7 191
Trout 9.0 94
Panfish 8.0 103
Catfish/bullhead 7.4 91
Crappie 6.4 91
White bass, striped bass, 4.8 62
and striped bass hybrids
Great Lakes
Walleye/sauger 0.7 6
Perch 0.6 5
Salmon 0.6 4
Black bass 0.5 5
Lake trout 0.3 2
Steelhead 0.3 3
Saltwater
Flatfish (flounder, halibut) 2.6 29
Bluefish 1.5 13
Striped bass 1.4 15
Seatrout 1.2 14
Mackerel 0.7 5
Salmon 0.6 4
13
thousand Great Lakes anglers.
Salmon drew 587 thousand
anglers for almost 4 million days
of fishing. Black bass and lake
trout attracted 492 and 349
thousand anglers respectively.
Among the 9.4 million saltwater
anglers, 2.6 million fished for
flatfish, including flounder and
halibut, on 29 million days.
Bluefish were a favorite of 1.5
million anglers on 13 million
days. Seatrout was sought by
1.2 million anglers on 14 million
days, and 683 thousand anglers
fished for mackerel on 5 million
days. Striped bass were sought
by 1.4 million anglers on 15
million days. Four million days
were spent fishing for salmon by
637 thousand anglers
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. More than 1 out
of every 6 U.S. residents went
fishing. While the national
participation rate was 17 per-cent,
the regional rates ranged
from 12 percent in the Middle
Atlantic Division to 25 percent in
the West North Central Division.
The West North Central, East
North Central, East South
Central, West South Central,
South Atlantic, and Mountain
Divisions all reported participa-tion
rates above the national
rate. The West South Central
Division had a participation rate
of 21 percent. The East South
Central and Mountain Divisions
had participation rates of 20
percent. The East North Central
and South Atlantic Divisions
both recorded participation rates
of 18 percent. The New England
Division recorded a participation
rate of 15 percent. The Pacific
Division had a participation rate
of 14 percent.
Fishing Participation
(National participation rate: 17%)
West South
Central
21%
East South
Central
20%
South
Atlantic
18%
New
England
15%
Middle
Atlantic
12%
East
North
Central
18%
West North
Central
25%
Mountain
20%
Pacific
14%
14
Fishing in State of
Residence and in
Other States
A majority of the 35.2 million
anglers who fished in 1996
did so within their home state.
Approximately 32.2 million
participants, 91 percent of all
anglers, fished in their state of
residence. More than 9.0 mil-lion,
26 percent, fished out-of-state.
Percentages do not add
to 100 because those sportsmen
who fished both in-state and
out-of-state were included in
both categories.
Most of the 29.0 million freshwa-ter
anglers (excluding the Great
Lakes) fished within their resi-dent
state, 26.6 million or 92
percent. Six million, 21 percent,
of these freshwater anglers,
fished out-of-state.
Eighty-two percent of Great
Lakes anglers enjoyed fishing
within their home state. Nearly
1.7 million anglers fished the
Great Lakes within their state
of residence. Comparatively,
479 thousand or 23 percent
of Great Lakes anglers fished
out-of-state.
Thirty-one percent of saltwater
anglers fished out-of-state.
Almost 7.2 million saltwater
anglers, 76 percent, also re-ported
fishing within the borders
of their home state. Those
saltwater anglers fishing out-of-state
numbered 2.9 million.
Fishing in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
In-State Out-of-State
Total Anglers 32.2 9.0
Freshwater, except
Great Lakes 26.6 6.0
Great Lakes 1.7 0.5
Saltwater 7.2 2.9
Source: Table 2
Percent of All Fishing, in State of
Residence and Other States
(Total: 35.2 million participants)
Other states
only
9%
In state of
residence
only
74%
In state of
residence and
in other states
17%
15
Days
Total freshwater
Lakes and
reservoirs
Rivers and
streams
24.8
Anglers
Types of Freshwater Fished,
Excluding Great Lakes
(In millions)
13.4
28.9
485
361
145
Total freshwater
(excluding Great Lakes)
Lakes and
reservoirs
Rivers and
streams
Types of Freshwater
Fished, Excluding
Great Lakes
Freshwater anglers fished in a
variety of waters. Most non-
Great Lakes freshwater anglers,
24.8 million (86 percent), fished
in flatwater including ponds,
lakes, or reservoirs on 361
million days. Rivers and streams
were utilized by 13.4 million
freshwater anglers (46 percent)
on 145 million days.
Great Lakes Anglers
Great Lakes fishing includes not
only the Great Lakes, but also
their tributaries, bodies of water
that connect the Great Lakes,
and the St. Lawrence River
south of the bridge at Cornwall.
The most popular of the lakes
among anglers was Lake Erie.
Thirty-seven percent of all the
Great Lakes anglers fished Lake
Erie on an average of 9 days
during 1996. Lake Michigan was
a close second in popularity.
Thirty-five percent enjoyed
fishing in Lake Michigan waters
with an average of 6 days per
angler recorded. Lake Huron
was fished by 14 percent of all
Great Lakes anglers. Anglers
fished Lake Huron an average of
7 days in 1996.
The tributaries to the lakes
attracted 10 percent of all Great
Lakes anglers. They averaged 12
days of fishing on these waters
in 1996. While Lake St. Clair
was fished by only 4 percent of
all Great Lakes anglers, these
participants fished an average of
14 days per year, more than any
other Great Lake or their con-necting
waters.
Great Lakes Fishing
Percentage
Anglers of all Great
(thousands) Lakes anglers
Total, all Great Lakes 2,039 100
Lake Erie 746 37
Lake Michigan 715 35
Lake Huron 279 14
Lake Ontario 260 13
Tributaries to the Great Lakes 205 10
Lake Superior 140 7
St. Lawrence River 95 5
Lake St. Clair 91 4
Source: Table 26
16
20%
9%
27%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Fished, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Fished, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
16%
21%
22%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
20%
15%
9%
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Sex
Men
73%
Women
27%
Women
Percent of Anglers, by Age
16 and 17
4%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
9%
25 to 34
20%
35 to 44
27%
55 to 64
10%
65 and
older
9%
Sex and Age of Anglers
While fishing was enjoyed by
more men than women in 1996,
a substantial number of women
fished as well. In 1996, 27
percent of American males
fished, while 9 percent of Ameri-can
females fished. Of the 35.2
million anglers who fished in the
U.S., 73 percent (25.7 million)
were male and 27 percent (9.5
million) were female.
Almost 10 million anglers, 27
percent of all anglers, were 35 to
44 years old, which is 22 percent
of the U.S. population in that age
group. They were followed by
7.2 million anglers 25 to 34
years old who comprised 20
percent of all anglers and had a
participation rate of 21 percent.
Next came the 45- to 54-year-old
age group, 7.0 million partici-pants
who accounted for 20
percent of all anglers. That age
group had a participation rate of
20 percent. The 3.5 million 55-
to 64-year-olds who fished,
comprised 10 percent of all
anglers and had a participation
rate of 15 percent. Anglers 18 to
24 years old numbered 3.3
million, 9 percent of total an-glers,
and recorded a 16 percent
participation rate. The 3.1
million anglers 65 years old and
older made up 9 percent of the
angler population, and had a
participation rate of 9 percent.
The 16- and 17-year-olds added
1.4 million individuals to the
angler population. They made
up only 4 percent for the total
angler population, but had a 20
percent participation rate.
Size of Residence
of Anglers
In 1996, 70 percent of U.S.
residents who fished lived inside
a Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA) with most anglers coming
from large MSA’s. People living
in MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more had a partici-pation
rate of 14 percent. Thirty-eight
percent of all anglers came
from these large urban areas.
Within MSA’s with populations of
250,000 to 999,999, 18 percent
of the total population enjoyed
fishing, representing 20 percent
of the angler population. In
Anglers, by Sex and Age
Total, both sexes 35.2 million
Male 25.7 million
Female 9.5 million
Total, all ages 35.2 million
16 and 17 1.4
18 to 24 3.3
25 to 34 7.2
35 to 44 9.7
45 to 54 7.0
55 to 64 3.5
65 and older 3.1
Source: Table 9
17
addition, MSA’s with populations
of 50,000 to 249,999 had a
participation rate of 21 percent;
they made up 11 percent of all
anglers. In areas outside of
MSA’s, 25 percent of the popula-tion
fished in 1996. These
participants made up 30 percent
of all anglers.
Income of Anglers
Anglers at all income levels
enjoyed fishing in 1996. Partici-pation
rates ranged from 9
percent for all individuals with
household incomes of $10,000
or less to 23 percent for those
who reported annual household
incomes of $40,000 to $49,999
and $50,000 to $74,999. Those
living in households with
incomes of $10,000 or less
comprised 4 percent of all
anglers; those with $50,000 to
$74,999 incomes made up 21
percent of all anglers; and those
with household incomes of
$40,000 to $49,999 comprised
12 percent of all anglers.
Twenty-one percent of the
individuals with household
earnings of $75,000 to $99,999
represented 9 percent of all
anglers. Persons with house-hold
earnings of $25,000 to
$29,999 had a participation rate
of 21 percent and comprised 8
percent of the angler population.
Another 8 percent of the angler
population had household
earnings of $100,000 or more,
and a 20 percent participation
rate. Anglers with household
incomes of $10,000 to $19,999
had a participation rate of 13
percent and made up 7 percent
of all anglers. Nineteen percent
of persons in households with
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999
represented 7 percent of all
anglers, as did persons in
households with incomes of
$35,000 to $39,999. However,
persons with household incomes
of $35,000 to $39,999 had a
participation rate of 22 percent,
while those within the $30,000 to
$34,999 income group had a
participation rate of 19 percent.
Finally 16 percent of all persons
in households earning $20,000
to $24,999 fished and made up
6 percent of the total angler
population in 1996. Twelve
percent of anglers did not report
their income.
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Residence
(Angler population: 35.2 million)
Outside
MSA
30%
Large
MSA
38%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Residence
(17% of total U.S. population fished)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
Medium
MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
14%
18%
21%
25%
Medium
MSA
20%
Small
MSA
11%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
9%
13%
16%
21%
19%
22%
23%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
23%
21%
20%
$100,000 or
more
18
10%
19%
11%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Education
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Fished, by Race
White
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
9%
17%
18%
19%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
18%
19%
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
5%
Black
5%
Black
Percent of Anglers 16 Years Old
and Older, by Education
5 years or
more of
college
13%
12 years
36%
4 years
of college
14%
1 to 3 years
of college
24%
9 to 11 years
10%
8 years or
less
3%
White
90%
Other
Education and Race
of Anglers
People from a variety of educa-tional
backgrounds fished in
1996. The lowest participation
rate, 9 percent, was found
among those with 8 years of
education or less. They made
up 3 percent of all anglers. The
highest participation rate, 19
percent, was found among those
individuals with 1 to 3 years of
college, and those who had 5
years or more of college.
Those persons with 1 to 3 years
of college made up 24 percent
of all anglers, while those with
5 years or more made up
13 percent of all anglers. Those
persons who had 4 years of
college had a participation
rate of 18 percent, which repre-sented
14 percent of all anglers,
while individuals with 12 years
of education made up 36 per-cent
of all anglers. They, too,
had a participation rate of 18
percent. Finally, those with
9 to 11 years of education had a
participation rate of 17 percent,
which represented 10 percent of
all anglers.
Participation rates among
people of different races varied.
Nineteen percent of the White
population fished, compared
with 10 percent of the Black
population and 11 percent of
other races. Among anglers, 90
percent of the total were White,
5 percent were Black, and 5
percent were other races.
Angler, by Education
and Race
(In millions)
Total anglers 35.2
Education
0-8 1.1
9-11 3.6
12 years 12.6
1-3 years college 8.6
4 years 5.0
5 years or more college 4.5
Race
White 31.8
Black 1.8
Other 1.7
Source: Table 9
19
1991-1996 Comparison
of Fishing Activity
The number of people fishing in
the United States is roughly the
same for the last two National
Survey years, but their number
of fishing days and expenditures
for fishing have increased sub-stantially.
The number of fishing
days increased 22 percent and
the fishing expenditures in-creased
37 percent.
The number of anglers in fresh-water
and saltwater did not
change (at the 95 percent
confidence level), although the
number of Great Lakes anglers
decreased 20 percent. The
amount of activity of the anglers
increased, with freshwater days
up 17 percent and saltwater
days up more than twice the
freshwater rate, 38 percent.
Fishing expenditures increased
for both the trip-related and
equipment categories. Trip-related
expenditures went
up 13 percent and the equip-ment
expenditures increased
78 percent. The purchase of
special equipment such as
boats and campers more than
doubled, increasing 123 percent.
Expenditures for fishing equip-ment,
such as rods and reels,
increased 23 percent.
Number of Anglers*
(Millions)
35.6 35.2
511
626
$27.6
$37.8
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of Fishing
(Millions)
Fishing
Expenditures
(Billions)
*The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Anglers, Total .......................................................... 35.6 100 35.2 100 -1*
All freshwater ........................................................ 31.0 87 29.7 84 -4*
Freshwater, except Great Lakes ....................... 30.2 85 28.9 82 -4*
Great Lakes....................................................... 2.6 7 2.0 6 -20
Saltwater ............................................................... 8.9 25 9.4 27 6*
Days, Total ............................................................... 511 100 626 100 22
All freshwater ........................................................ 440 86 515 82 17
Freshwater, except Great Lakes ....................... 431 84 485 78 13
Great Lakes....................................................... 25 5 20 3 -21*
Saltwater ............................................................... 75 15 103 17 38
Fishing Expenditures, Total** ................................ $27,589 100 $37,673 100 37
Trip-related ............................................................ 13,625 49 15,257 40 12
Equipment ............................................................ 10,770 39 19,174 51 78
Fishing equipment............................................. 4,301 16 5,309 14 23
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 712 3 1,037 3 46
Special equipment ............................................ 5,756 21 12,828 34 123
Other ..................................................................... 3,194 12 3,235 9 1*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for one survey
year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure totals. Excludes expenditures for heating
and cooking fuel because 1991 Survey did not collect this information.
21
Hunting
22
Hunting
Highlights
In 1996, 14 million people,
16 years old and older, enjoyed
hunting a variety of game ani-mals
within the United States.
They hunted 257 million days
and took 223 million trips.
Their expenditures totaled
$20.6 billion.
In 1996, 11.3 million hunters
pursued big game such as deer
and elk on 154 million days.
They spent $9.7 billion on trips
and equipment during the year.
A total of 6.9 million people
hunted small game including
squirrels and rabbits. They
hunted small game on 75 million
days and spent $2.5 billion on
their hunting trips and equip-ment.
Migratory bird hunters
numbered 3.1 million. They
spent 27 million days hunting
birds such as waterfowl and
dove. Their trip and equipment
expenditures totaled $1.3 billion.
Other animals, such as raccoons
and groundhogs, were sought by
1.5 million hunters on 25 million
days. These hunters spent $433
million on trips and equipment
for the year.
Total Hunting
(In millions)
Total Hunters
Big game
Small game
Migratory bird
Other animals
Days Trips
14.0
11.3
6.9
25 23
154
114
257
223
Hunters
Scale enlarged to show detail. Detail of days does not add to total
because of multiple responses.
3.1
1.5
75
27
64
23
23
Hunting Expenditures
Of the $ 20.6 billion spent
by hunters in 1996, 25 percent,
$5.2 billion, was spent on
trip-related expenses. Food and
lodging totaled $2.5 billion, 49
percent of all trip-related ex-penses.
Transportation cost
hunters $1.8 billion, 35 percent
of their trip-related expenditures.
Other trip-related expenses such
as guide fees, land use fees, and
equipment rental were $864
million or 17 percent of all trip-related
expenses.
Total hunting equipment expen-ditures
were $11.3 billion in
1996, 55 percent of all hunting
expenses. Hunting equipment,
such as guns and rifles, tele-scopic
sights, and ammunition,
cost hunters $5.5 billion, 49
percent of all equipment costs.
Expenditures for auxiliary equip-ment,
including camping equip-ment,
binoculars, and special
hunting clothing, accounted for
$1.2 billion or 11 percent of all
equipment expenses. Special
equipment, such as campers or
trail bikes, amounted to $4.5
billion or 40 percent of all
equipment expenditures.
Hunters spent $355 million on
magazines, books, membership
dues and contributions, 2 per-cent
of total expenses. Land
leasing and ownership expendi-tures
totaled $3.2 billion, 15
percent of the total.
Total Hunting
Hunters 14.0 million
Big game 11.3 million
Small game 6.9 million
Migratory bird 3.1 million
Other animals 1.5 million
Days 257 million
Big game 154 million
Small game 75 million
Migratory bird 27 million
Other animals 25 million
Trips 223 million
Big game 114 million
Small game 64 million
Migratory bird 23 million
Other animals 23 million
Expenditures $20.6 billion
Big game 9.7 billion
Small game 2.5 billion
Migratory bird 1.3 billion
Other animals 0.4 billion
Unspecified 6.7 billion
Detail does not add to total
because of multiple responses
and nonresponse.
Source: Tables 1 and 17-21
Total Hunting Expenditures
Total hunting expenditures $20.6 billion
Total trip-related $ 5.2 billion
Food and lodging 2.5 billion
Transportation 1.8 billion
Other trip costs 0.9 billion
Total equipment expenditures $11.3 billion
Hunting equipment 5.5 billion
Auxiliary equipment 1.2 billion
Special equipment 4.5 billion
Total other hunting expenditures $4.1 billion
Magazines, books 0.1 billion
Membership dues and contributions 0.2 billion
Land leasing and ownership 3.2 billion
Licenses, stamps, tags, and permits 0.7 billion
Source: Table 17
Expenditures
(Total expenditures $20.6 billion)
Percent of Total
Hunting Expenditures
(Total expenditures $20.6 billion)
Other animals
$0.4 billion
Migratory bird
$1.3 billion
Small game
$2.5 billion
Other
20%
Equipment
55%
Trip-related
25%
Unspecified
$6.7 billion
Big game
$9.7 billion
24
Big Game Hunting Trip and
Equipment Exenditures
(Total expenditures $9.7 billion)
Equipment $6.5
billion
Trip-related $3.2
billion
Small Game Hunting Trip and
Equipment Exenditures
(Total expenditures $2.5 billion)
Equipment $1.3
billion
Trip-related $1.2
billion
Big Game Hunting
In 1996, 11.3 million hunters
devoted 154 million days to
hunting big game including deer,
elk, bear, and wild turkey. They
took 114 million trips. Each
hunter spent an average of 14
days hunting big game in 1996.
Trip and equipment expenditures
for big game hunters amounted
to $9.7 billion. Trip-related
expenses totaled $3.2 billion. Of
that amount, food and lodging
totaled $1.6 billion or 49 percent
of the trip-related costs. Trans-portation
costs were $1.0 billion
for big game hunters, 32 percent
of trip-associated costs. Other
trip-related expenses amounted
to $585 million, or 18 percent of
trip costs.
Big game hunters spent $6.5
billion on equipment. Hunting
equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.) accounted for $2.6 billion.
Purchases of auxiliary equip-ment
(camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.) totaled $847
million. And special equipment
(vans, trail bikes, etc.) cost big
game hunters $3.1 billion.
Small Game Hunting
On a total of 75 million days
in 1996, 6.9 million hunters
pursued small game such as
rabbits, squirrel, pheasants,
quail, and grouse. They took
64 million trips. Small game
sportsmen averaged 11 days
in the field hunting.
Small game hunters spent $2.5
billion on trips and equipment in
1996. Of the $1.2 billion spent
on trip-related costs, $595
million, or 50 percent of all small
game trip-related costs, were
spent on food and lodging.
Transportation costs accounted
for $450 million or 38 percent of
small game trip expenses. Other
trip-related expenditures contrib-uted
$147 million or 12 percent
to the total spent on small game
hunting trips.
Small game equipment expendi-tures
totaled $1.3 billion. Spe-cifically,
purchases of hunting
equipment (guns, ammunition,
etc.) accounted for $965 million
spent by small game hunters
during the year. Auxiliary equip-ment
(camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.) cost $62 million,
and special equipment (vans,
trail bikes, etc.) cost small game
hunters $262 million for the year.
Big Game
Hunters 11.3 million
Days 154 million
Trips 114 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $9.7 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 18
Small Game
Hunters 6.9 million
Days 75 million
Trips 64 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $2.5 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 19
25
Migratory Bird Hunting
In 1996, 3.1 million migratory
bird hunters devoted 27 million
days on 23 million trips for
hunting birds such as doves,
ducks, and geese. Migratory
bird hunters spent an average of
9 days hunting for the year.
The $1.3 billion spent by migra-tory
bird hunters in 1996 was
spent on hunting trips and
equipment. Of the items contrib-uting
to this sum, $576 million
was spent on trip-related ex-penses.
A further breakdown
reveals food and lodging cost
migratory bird hunters $263
million, or 46 percent of trip-related
expenses; transportation
accounted for $196 million, or 34
percent of all trip costs. Other
trip expenses amounted to $116
million making up 20 percent of
the total trip-related expendi-tures
for migratory bird hunters.
Migratory bird hunters pur-chased
$720 million worth of
equipment in 1996. They spent
$503 million on hunting equip-ment
(guns, ammunition, etc.).
Another $82 million was spent
by migratory bird hunters on
auxiliary equipment (camping
equipment, binoculars, etc.),
and $135 million was spent on
special equipment (vans, trail
bikes, etc.).
Hunting Other Animals
During 1996, 1.5 million hunters
reported spending 25 million
days on 23 million trips pursuing
other animals such as ground-hogs,
raccoons, foxes, and
coyotes. They averaged 16 days
of hunting in 1996.
Overall, they spent $433 million
in 1996 on trips and equipment.
Trip-related costs totaled $211
million. Of that, food and lodging
cost $86 million or 41 percent of
trip-related costs; transportation
was $110 million, 52 percent
percent of trip-related expenses;
and other trip expenses were
$14 million, 7 percent of trip-related
costs.
Equipment expenditures for
hunting other animals totaled
$222 million in 1996. Hunters
pursuing other animals spent
$117 million on hunting equip-ment
(guns, ammunition, etc.),
and $10 million on auxiliary
equipment (camping equipment,
binoculars, etc.).
Migratory Bird
Hunters 3.1 million
Days 27 million
Trips 23 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $1.3 billion
Source: Tables 1 and 20
Other Animals
Hunters 1.5 million
Days 25 million
Trips 23 million
Trip and equipment
expenditures $433 million
Source: Tables 1 and 21
Migratory Bird Hunting Trip and
Equipment Expenditures
(Total expenditures $1.3 million)
Equipment
$720
million
Trip-related $576
million
Trip and Equipment Expenditures for
Hunting Other Animals
(Total expenditures $433 million)
Equipment
$222
million
Trip-related $211
million
26
Comparative
Hunting Highlights
In 1996, big game hunters
averaged 14 days of hunting and
10 trips per hunter. Small game
hunters spent an average of 11
days hunting in the field on an
average of 9 trips. In compari-son,
migratory bird hunters
spent an average of 9 days and
7 trips hunting. Those partici-pants
hunting other animals
averaged 16 days and 15 trips
pursuing their game.
On average, big game hunters
spent more money on trips and
equipment than other hunters in
1996. They averaged $860 per
hunter for the year. Small game
hunters spent an average of
$357 per hunter during 1996.
Migratory bird hunters averaged
$422, and those hunting other
animals spent $284 per hunter
for the year.
In 1996, trip expenditures for all
hunting averaged $369 per
hunter for the year, a daily
average of $20. The average for
trip expenditures per hunter
varied by type of hunting. Ex-penditures
for big game hunting
trips averaged $281 per hunter
for lodging, food, transportation
and other trip-related expenses
for the year ($21 per day). Small
game hunters spent $172 on
average for their annual hunting
trip expenses ($16 per day).
Persons taking trips for migratory
bird hunting spent an average of
$187 ($22 per day) while trip
expenditures for hunting other
animals averaged $139 per
hunter for the year ($9 per day).
Hunting for
Selected Game
For big game hunters, deer was
the most popular draw among
10.7 million hunters on 131
million days. The 959 thousand
hunters who hunted elk went out
on 7 million days. While bear
attracted 405 thousand hunters
on 3 million days, wild turkey
drew 2.2 million hunters on 19
million days. In addition, 513
thousand hunters spent 5.5
million days hunting other big
game animals.
In 1996, approximately 3.1
million small game hunters
hunted rabbits and hares on 29
Comparative
Hunting, by Type
of Hunting
Days per
hunter
Trips per
hunter
Trip
expenditures
per hunter
Trip
expenditures
per day
18
14
11
9
16
$369
$281
$172
$139
$20
$21
$16
16
10
9
$187
Total
Big game
Small game
Migratory bird
Other animals
7
15
$22
$9
Hunting for Selected Game
(In millions)
Type of hunting Hunters Days
Big game 11.3 154
Deer 10.7 131
Wild turkey 2.2 19
Elk 1.0 7
Bear 0.4 3
Small game 6.9 75
Squirrels 3.2 25
Rabbits and hares 3.1 29
Pheasant 2.3 17
Quail 1.5 11
Grouse/prairie chicken 1.2 10
Migratory bird 3.1 27
Doves 1.6 8
Ducks 1.6 14
Geese 0.9 8
Other animals 1.5 25
Source: Table 7
27
Hunting Participation
(National participation rate: 7%)
West South
Central
8%
East South
Central
10%
South
Atlantic
6%
New
England
5%
Middle
Atlantic
5%
East
North
Central
8%
West North
Central
14%
Mountain
9%
Pacific
4%
million days. Quail was flushed
by 1.5 million hunters on 11
million days, while grouse and
prairie chicken were favorites of
1.2 million hunters on 10 million
days. Squirrels were hunted by
3.2 million participants on 25
million days. Pheasants at-tracted
2.3 million hunters on 17
million days. In addition, 447
thousand hunters spent 4.3
million days hunting other small
game animals.
Among those hunting migratory
birds, 8 million days were spent
by 1.6 million participants dove
hunting. Ducks were hunted by
1.6 million enthusiasts on 14
million days. On 8 million days,
915 thousand hunters hunted
geese in 1996. An additional
291 thousand sportsmen hunted
other migratory bird species on 2
million days.
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. The national
hunting participation rate was
7 percent.
Regionally, participation rates
ranged from 4 percent in the
Pacific Census Division to 14
percent in the West North Cen-tral
Division. The East North
Central, East South Central,
West South Central, and Moun-tain
Divisions all had participa-tion
rates above the national rate
of 7 percent. The East North
Central and West South Central
Divisions both had a participa-tion
rate of 8 percent. The East
South Central Division’s partici-pation
rate was 10 percent and
the Mountain Division recorded
a rate of 9 percent. The Middle
Atlantic and New England
Divisions recorded participation
rates of 5 percent, while the
South Atlantic Division disclosed
a participation rate of 6 percent.
Hunting in State of
Residence and in
Other States
An overwhelming majority
of participants hunted within
their state of residence, 13.3
million or 95 percent of all
hunters. Only 2.0 million,
14 percent, hunted in another
state. Percentages do not add
to 100 because those sportsmen
who hunted both in-state and
out-of-state were included in
both categories.
28
In 1996, 10.8 million big game
hunters, 95 percent of all big
game hunters, hunted within
their state of residence, while
only 12 percent, 1.4 million
people, traveled to another state
to hunt big game. Likewise, 95
percent of all small game hunt-ers,
6.6 million hunters, pursued
game in their resident state.
Eleven percent, 737 thousand,
ventured across state lines to
hunt small game. Ninety-four
percent of all migratory bird
hunters, 2.9 million participants,
hunted within their resident
state. Eleven percent or 323
thousand of these sportsmen
hunted out-of-state. Among
sportsmen who hunted other
animals, 95 percent, 1.5 million,
hunted in-state and 9 percent,
140 thousand participants,
hunted out-of-state.
Hunting on Public and
Private Lands
In 1996, 14 million hunters 16
years old and older hunted on
public land, private land, or both.
Some hunters, 2.3 million, 17
percent, used publicly owned
lands exclusively. Those hunters
who hunted only on private land
numbered 7.2 million, 51 per-cent.
Slightly over 4 million
hunters, 30 percent, hunted on
both public and private lands.
Over 6.5 million, 47 percent,
hunted on publicly owned lands
compared to 11.4 million, 81
percent, who hunted on privately
owned land.
In 1996, 6.5 million hunters used
public lands on 77 million days,
30 percent of all hunting days.
Forty-four percent of big game
hunters spent 43 million days on
public lands. Among the 6.9
million small game hunters, 38
percent used public land on 20
million days. Approximately 1.1
million migratory bird hunters, 36
percent of all migratory bird
hunters, spent 7.8 million days
on public lands. Of the partici-pants
who hunted other animals
in 1996, 394 thousand, 26
percent pursued their game on
public lands on 6 million days.
In contrast, 11.4 million
hunters spent 198 million
days, 77 percent of all hunting
days, pursuing their sport on
private lands in 1996. Seventy-seven
percent of big game
hunters, 82 percent of small
game hunters, 77 percent of
migratory bird hunters, and 86
percent of hunters pursuing
other animals spent time
hunting on private lands.
People Hunting on Public
and Private Lands
Public only
17%
Private only
51%
Public and
private
30%
Unspecified
2%
Percent of All Hunting, in State of
Residence and Other States
(Total: 14.0 million participants)
In other
states only
5%
In state of
residence
only
86%
In state of
residence
and in
other states
9%
Hunting in State of Residence
and in Other States
(In millions)
In-state Out-of-state
All hunters 13.3 2.0
Big game 10.8 1.4
Small game 6.6 0.7
Migratory bird 2.9 0.3
Other animals 1.5 0.1
Source: Table 6
29
9%
1%
13%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Hunted, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Hunted, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
7%
8%
9%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
8%
6%
3%
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Sex
Men
91%
Women
9%
Women
Percent of Hunters, by Age
16 and 17
5%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
10%
25 to 34
20%
35 to 44
27%
55 to 64
11%
65 and
older
7%
Days spent hunting on private
land also varied by type of
hunting. In 1996, big game
hunters spent 69 percent (106
million days) of their total hunt-ing
days on private lands; small
game hunters spent 73 percent
(55 million days) of their hunting
days on private lands; and
migratory bird hunters spent 67
percent (18 million days) of their
hunting days on private lands.
Persons hunting other animals
spent 81 percent (20 million
days) of their hunting days on
private lands.
Sex and Age of Hunters
Of the U.S. population 16 years
old and older, 13 percent of the
males and 1 percent of the
females enjoyed hunting in
1996. Of the 14 million partici-pants
who hunted in 1996, 91
percent (12.8 million) were
male and 9 percent (1.2 million)
were female.
Hunter participation was seen in
all age groups around the
country. The proportion of
hunters by age group ranged
from 5 percent among hunters
16 and 17 years old to 27 per-cent
for those hunters 35 to 44
years old. Nine percent of the
age group 16 and 17 years old
hunted in 1996. They numbered
672 thousand hunters. The
participation rate for 35- to 44-
year olds also was 9 percent, but
they numbered 3.8 million
hunters. Eight percent of all
persons 25 to 34 years old
hunted. They numbered 2.8
million hunters, 20 percent of all
hunters. Another 20 percent of
hunters, 2.9 million people, were
45 to 54 years old. Their partici-pation
rate was 8 percent.
Hunters 55 to 64 years old
numbered 1.5 million and repre-sented
6 percent of the general
population 55 to 64 years old
and 11 percent of all hunters. In
the 18- to 24-year-old group, 1.4
million hunters made up 10
percent of all hunters. That age
group had a participation rate of
7 percent. Finally, 967 thousand
people 65 years old and older
made up 7 percent of all hunters.
This age group had a participa-tion
rate of 3 percent for hunting
in 1996.
Hunters, by Sex and Age
Total, both sexes 14.0 million
Male 12.8 million
Female 1.2 million
Total, all ages
16 and 17 0.7 million
18 to 24 1.4 million
25 to 34 2.8 million
35 to 44 3.8 million
45 to 54 2.9 million
55 to 64 1.5 million
65 and older 1.0 million
Source: Table 10
30
Size of Residence
of Hunters
While most hunters were from
areas outside heavily populated
Metropolitan Statistical Areas
(MSA), a substantial number of
people living in large MSA’s also
enjoyed hunting. Twenty-four
percent of all hunters were from
MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more. Three
percent of the total residents of
these large MSA’s hunted. For
MSA’s with populations of
250,000 to 999,999, 7 percent of
the population hunted; they
comprised 19 percent of all
hunters. Nine percent of all
residents of MSA’s with popula-tions
of 50,000 to 249,999
hunted in 1996. Thirteen
percent of all hunters resided in
these areas.
Although 21 percent of the U.S.
population 16 years of age and
older resided in areas outside
MSA’s in 1996, 44 percent of all
hunters lived outside MSA’s.
Fifteen percent of all people
living outside MSA’s hunted in
1996 in contrast with 5 percent
of all people living inside MSA’s
who hunted.
Income of Hunters
Participation rates among
hunters with different annual
household incomes varied from
3 percent of persons living in
households earning less than
$10,000 a year (3 percent of all
hunters came from these house-holds)
to 10 percent of those
persons living in households
reporting incomes of $40,000 to
$49,999 (13 percent of all
hunters came from these house-holds).
Five percent of the
persons in households reporting
incomes of $10,000 to $19,999
comprised 7 percent of all
hunters. Six percent of the
nation’s population with house-hold
incomes of $20,000 to
$24,999 a year enjoyed hunting.
They made up 6 percent of all
hunters. Eight percent of all
people in households earning
$25,999 to $29,999 hunted.
They constituted 7 percent of all
hunters. In households reporting
incomes of $30,000 to $34,999,
9 percent was the participation
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Residence
(Hunter population: 14.0 million)
Outside
MSA
44%
Large
MSA
24%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Residence
(7% of total U.S. population hunted)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
Medium
MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
3%
7%
9%
25%
Medium
MSA
19%
Small
MSA
13%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
3%
5%
6%
8%
9%
9%
10%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
9%
8%
6%
$100,000 or
more
15%
31
2%
8%
3%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Hunted, by Education
Percent of U.S. Population 16 Years
Old and Older Who Hunted, by Race
White
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
4%
8%
8%
7%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
6%
6%
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
3%
Black
2%
Black
Percent of Hunters 16 Years Old
and Older, by Education
5 years or
more of
college
10%
12 years
41%
4 years
of college
12%
1 to 3 years
of college
22%
9 to 11 years
12%
8 years or
less
3%
White
95%
Other
rate. Residents of these house-holds
represented 8 percent of
all hunters. Nine percent of the
persons in households reporting
incomes of $35,000 to $39,999
totaled 7 percent of all hunters.
Nine percent of those in house-holds
earning $50,000 to
$74,999 represented 22 percent
of all hunters. In households
with incomes of $75,000 to
$99,999, 8 percent of the resi-dents
hunted. Persons in that
income bracket made up 8
percent of all hunters. Finally,
6 percent of those in households
earning $100,000 or more
per year enjoyed hunting and
contributed 6 percent to the
hunter population. Thirteen
percent of the sample did not
report their income.
Education and Race
of Hunters
People from a variety of educa-tional
backgrounds went hunting
in 1996. Participation rates
ranged from 8 percent among
those individuals with 9 to 12
years of school to 4 percent
among individuals with 8 years
or less of education. Those with
8 years or less of education
represented 3 percent of all
hunters. Those with 9 to 11
years of education represented
12 percent of all hunters and
those with 12 years of education
made up 41 percent of all hunt-ers.
Hunters with 1 to 3 years of
college made up 22 percent of
the hunter total, showing a 7
percent participation rate.
Twelve percent of all hunters had
4 years of college. Six percent
of all people in the U.S. with 4
years of college hunted in 1996.
Those with 5 years or more of
college represented 10 percent
of all hunters, and of that group,
6 percent participated.
While 7 percent of the U.S.
population went hunting in 1996,
participation among races
varied. Eight percent of the
nation’s White population
hunted, 2 percent of the Black
population hunted, and 3 per-cent
of the other races hunted.
Of the 14 million hunters, 95
percent were White, 2 percent
were Black, and 3 percent were
of other races.
Hunters, by Education and Race
Total hunters 14.0 million
Education
0 to 8 years 0.5 million
9 to 11 years 1.6 million
12 years 5.8 million
1 to 3 years of college 3.1 million
4 years of college 1.7 million
5 years or more
of college 1.3 million
Race
White 13.2 million
Black 0.3 million
Other 0.4 million
Source: Table 10
32
1991-1996 Comparison
of Hunting Activity
The number of people hunting in
the United States and their days
pursuing their sport are roughly
the same for the last two Na-tional
Survey years, but their
expenditures for hunting have
increased 45 percent. A robust
1996 economy after several
years of an economic downturn
can at least partly explain the
expenditure increase.
The number of hunters did not
change (at the 95 percent
confidence level) for any type of
hunting except small game
hunters, who decreased in
number by 9 percent. The level
of activity of the hunters as
measured by days in the field
significantly changed for big
game, which increased 20
percent, and migratory birds,
which increased 19 percent.
Hunting expenditures increased
for both the trip-related and
equipment categories. Trip-related
expenditures went up
30 percent and equipment
expenditures increased 90
percent. The purchase of special
equipment such as boats and
campers more than tripled,
increasing 215 percent. Expendi-tures
for hunting equipment such
as firearms and ammunition
increased 46 percent.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Hunters, Total .......................................................... 14.1 100 14.0 100 -1*
Big game............................................................... 10.7 76 11.3 81 5*
Small game ........................................................... 7.6 54 6.9 50 -9
Migratory bird ........................................................ 3.0 21 3.1 22 2*
Other animal ......................................................... 1.4 10 1.5 11 8*
Days, Total ............................................................... 236 100 257 100 9*
Big game............................................................... 128 54 154 60 20
Small game ........................................................... 77 33 75 29 -3*
Migratory bird ........................................................ 22 9 27 10 19
Other animal ......................................................... 19 8 25 10 27*
Hunting Expenditures, Total** ............................... $14,187 100 $20,329 100 43
Trip-related ............................................................ 3,957 28 4,871 24 23
Equipment ............................................................ 5,944 42 11,273 55 90
Hunting equipment ............................................ 3,776 27 5,519 27 46
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 731 5 1,233 6 69
Special equipment ............................................ 1,437 10 4,521 22 215
Other ..................................................................... 4,286 30 4,178 21 -3*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for the number
of dollars for one survey year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure estimates. Excludes expenditures for
boating costs and heating and cooking fuel because the 1991 Survey did not collect this information.
Number of Hunters*
(Millions)
14.1 14.0 236 257 $14.2
$20.3
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of Hunting*
(Millions)
Hunting
Expenditures
(Billions)
* The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
33
Wildlife
Watching
34
Wildlife-watching (formerly
called nonconsumptive) activities
including observing, feeding,
and photographing wildlife
continue to be popular in the
United States. These activities
are categorized here as being
either residential—within a mile
of one’s home—or nonresiden-tial,
at least 1 mile from home.
The 1996 Survey collected
information only on primary
wildlife-watching activities,
those activities whose main
objective was to observe, feed,
or photograph wildlife. Second-ary
or incidental participation
such as observing wildlife
while pleasure driving was not
included in the Survey.
In 1996, 62.9 million U.S. resi-dents,
31 percent of the U.S.
population 16 years old and
older, enjoyed a variety of
wildlife-watching activities.
People who took a primary
interest in wildlife around their
homes numbered 60.8 million,
while those who took trips away
from their homes for the primary
purpose of participating in
wildlife-watching recreation
numbered 23.7 million people.
Wildlife-
Watching
Highlights
Wildlife-Watching
Participants, by Activity
(In millions)
Total wildlife-watching 62.9
participants
Nonresidential 23.7
Observed wildlife 22.9
Photographed wildlife 12.0
Fed wildlife 10.0
Residential 60.8
Fed wildlife 54.1
Observed wildlife 44.1
Photographed wildlife 16.0
Maintained plantings 13.4
or natural areas
Visited public parks 11.0
or areas
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 35
Wildlife-Watching Participants
(In millions)
Total
62.9
(100%)
Residential
60.8
(97%)
23.7
(38%)
Nonresidential
35
Wildlife-Watching
Expenditures
In 1996, 84 percent of all pri-mary
wildlife-watching partici-pants
16 years old and older
spent $29.2 billion, an average
of $554 per spender. These
expenditures represented
29 percent of the total
amount spent for all wildlife-related
recreation.
In 1996, wildlife-watching partici-pants
spent $9.4 billion on trips
to pursue their activities. Food
and lodging accounted for $5.4
billion, transportation expenses
were $2.9 billion, and other trip
costs, such as land use fees and
equipment rental, were $1.1
billion for the year.
These recreationists purchased
$16.7 billion worth of equipment.
They spent $8.2 billion on
wildlife-watching equipment
including binoculars, film, bird
food, and special clothing.
Auxiliary equipment expendi-tures
for items such as tents and
backpacking equipment
amounted to $858 million for the
year. Participants spent $7.6
billion on special equipment
including off-road vehicles, trail
bikes, and boats.
For the year, wildlife-watching
participants also spent $395
million on magazines and books;
$862 million on membership
dues and contributions; $1.3
billion on land leasing and
ownership; and $537 million
on plantings.
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
Total wildlife-watching expenditures $29.2 billion
Total trip-related $9.4 billion
Food and lodging 5.4
Transportation 2.9
Other trip costs 1.1
Total equipment expenditures $16.7 billion
Wildlife-watching equipment 8.2
Auxiliary equipment 0.9
Special equipment 7.6
Total other expenditures $3.1 billion
Magazines, books 0.4
Membership dues and contributions 0.9
Land leasing and ownership 1.3
Plantings 0.5
Source: Table 40
Wildlife-Watching Expenditures
(Total expenditures $29.2 billion)
Trip-Related Expenditures
(Total expenditures $9.4 billion)
Other
$3.1 billion
11%
Other trip-related
costs
$1.1 billion
12%
Lodging
$1.9 billion
20%
Trans-portation
$2.9 billion
31%
Equipment
$16.7 billion
57%
Trip-related
$9.4 billion
32%
Food
$3.4 billion
36%
36
Residential
Activities Highlights
Residential participants 16 years
old and older numbered 60.8
million in 1996, 97 percent of all
wildlife-watching recreationists.
The most popular residential
wildlife-watching activity,
feeding birds and other wildlife,
was enjoyed by 54.1 million
people, 89 percent of all
residential wildlife-watching
participants. Over 44 million
people observed wildlife in
1996, constituting 73 percent
of the residential participants.
Photographing wildlife was
enjoyed by over 16 million
people, or 26 percent of all
residential participants. Eleven
million people, 18 percent of all
residential participants, visited
public areas including parks
within one mile of their homes.
Approximately 9.2 million partici-pants,
15 percent of all residen-tial
participants, maintained
plantings for the primary pur-pose
of benefiting wildlife.
Finally, 7.9 million people, 13
percent of the residential partici-pants,
maintained natural areas
for the primary purpose of
benefiting wildlife.
Residential Participants
(In millions)
Total participants 60.8
Feed wild birds 52.2
Observe wildlife 44.1
Feed other wildlife 19.6
Photograph wildlife 16.0
Visit public areas 11.0
Maintain plantings 9.2
Maintain natural areas 7.9
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 37
Percent of Total Residential Participation, by Activity
(Total: 60.8 million participants)
Observe
26%
73%
86%
32%
13%
15%
18%
Feed Photograph
wild
birds
Feed
other
wildlife
Maintain
natural
areas
Maintain
plantings
Visit
public
areas
37
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed by
Residential Participants
Of the 44.1 million participants
who reported observing wildlife
around their homes, a large
majority, 42.2 million, observed
birds. Observing mammals was
popular among 38.5 million
participants. Insects and spiders
attracted the attention of 19.8
million people; 13.6 million
observed amphibians or reptiles;
and 11.1 million people reported
observing fish or other wildlife.
Of the 54.1 million residential
wildlife feeders in 1996, 96
percent fed birds. Over 52
million people fed birds an
average of eight months in 1996.
Approximately 19.6 million
participants fed other wildlife for
7 months, on average, during
the year.
More than 16 million residential
participants photographed
wildlife. Twenty-nine percent of
these photographers spent 2 to
3 days taking pictures of wildlife
during the year. Eight percent
(1.2 million) of the participants
spent 21 or more days photo-graphing
wildlife. Sixteen per-cent
(2.5 million) of the partici-pants
spent 1 day photographing
wildlife; 18 percent (2.9 million) 4
to 5 days; 18 percent (2.8 mil-lion)
6 to 10 days; and 11 per-cent
(1.7 million) 11 to 20 days.
96%
Percent of Residential
Wildlife Observers, by Type of
Wildlife Observed
(Total wildlife observers 44.1 million)
Birds
Mammals
Insects and
spiders
Reptiles and
amphibians
87%
45%
Fish and
other wildlife
31%
25%
Days Spent Photographing Wildlife
(Total participants: 16 million)
6-10 days
18%
1 day
16%
2-3
days
29%
11-20 days
11%
21 days
or more
8%
4-5 days
18%
38
Residential
Participation by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people
16 years old and older lived in
the United States. Of those
individuals, 30 percent ob-served,
fed, or photographed
wildlife around their homes.
The participation rates of these
residential participants varied
from region to region.
Residential wildlife-watching
participation rates ranged from
26 percent for residents in the
West South Central Division to
35 percent for those in the West
North Central and New England
Divisions. The New England,
East North Central, West North
Central, and Mountain Divisions
all had participation rates above
the national participation rate of
30 percent. The East North
Central Division’s participation
rate was 34 percent. The Moun-tain
Division followed with a
participation rate of 32 percent.
The participation rates for both
the South Atlantic and East
South Central Divisions were 30
percent. The Middle Atlantic and
Pacific Divisions both had
participation rates of 27 percent.
Wildlife-Watching Residential Participation
(National participation rate: 30%)
West South
Central
26%
East South
Central
30%
South
Atlantic
30%
New
England
35%
Middle
Atlantic
27%
East
North
Central
34%
West North
Central
35%
Mountain
32%
Pacific
27%
39
18%
31%
29%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Participated, by Age
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Sex
Men
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
15%
26%
34%
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 and older
34%
36%
32%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Sex
Men
46%
Women
54%
Women
Percent of Residential
Participants by Age
16 and 17
2%
45 to 54
20%
18 to 24
5%
25 to 34
15%
35 to 44
25%
55 to 64
14%
65 and
older
19%
Sex and Age of
Residential Participants
Residential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by males
and females in similar propor-tions.
In 1996, 29 percent of
American males 16 years
old and older enjoyed residential
activities, as did 31 percent
of American females of the
same age group. Of the
60.8 million residential wildlife-watching
participants, 46 per-cent
(28.1 million) were male
and 54 percent (32.7 million)
were female.
Of the 60.8 million residential
participants in 1996, 25 percent
or 15.3 million were 35 to 44
years old, and 20 percent or
12.3 million were 45 to 54 years
old. The participation rate for
residential wildlife-watching
recreation for both the 35- to 44-
year-old age group as well as for
the 45- to 54-year-olds was 34
percent. Participants 65 years
old and older numbered 11.4
million with a 32 percent
participation rate. They repre-sented
19 percent of all residen-tial
participants. Participants 25
to 34 years old numbered 9.2
million and represented 15
percent of all residential partici-pants.
Their participation rate
was 26 percent. There were 8.3
million participants in the 55- to
64-year-old age category, ac-counting
for 14 percent of all
residential recreationists and
having a participation rate of 36
percent. The 18- to 24-year-old
participants numbered 3.0
million, or 5 percent of the
residential participants. Their
participation rate was 15 percent
in 1996. Finally, the 16- and 17-
year-old participants totaled 1.2
million with a participation rate
of 18 percent, accounting for
2 percent of the residential
wildlife-watching participants.
Residential Participants,
by Sex and Age
(In millions)
Total, both sexes 60.8
Male 28.1
Female 32.7
Total, all ages 60.8
16 and 17 1.2
18 to 24 3.0
25 to 34 9.2
35 to 44 15.3
45 to 54 12.3
55 to 64 8.3
65 and older 11.4
Source: Table 42
40
Size of Residence of
Residential Participants
In 1996, 30 percent of all U.S.
residents 16 years old and older
participated in wildlife-watching
recreation around their homes.
Seventy-five percent of these
residential wildlife participants
lived in metropolitan areas of
various sizes. Participation rates
varied by population size of
metropolitan areas. People
living in Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (MSA’s) with populations
of 1,000,000 or more had a
participation rate of 27 percent.
These recreationists comprised
44 percent of the total residential
participants. In MSA’s of
250,000 to 999,999 the partici-pation
rate was 30 percent,
reflecting 20 percent of all
residential recreationists. Eleven
percent of the residential wildlife-watching
participants were from
MSA’s with populations of
50,000 to 249,999. The popula-tion
of these areas had a partici-pation
rate of 35 percent.
The highest participation rate
for residential wildlife-watching
participants was among persons
residing outside of MSA’s. While
21 percent of the total U.S.
population lived outside these
areas in 1996, they represented
25 percent of all residential
wildlife-watching participants.
Thirty-six percent of that
population group participated in
wildlife-watching activities
around their homes in 1996.
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Residence
(Total residential participants 60.8 million)
Large
MSA
44%
Small
MSA
11%
Medium
MSA
20%
Outside
MSA
25%
Percent of U.S. Population 16
Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Residence
(30% of total U.S. population participated)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
27%
30%
35%
36%
Medium MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
41
Income of Residential
Participants
Residential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by people
of all income levels. Participa-tion
rates ranged from 22 per-cent
among U.S. residents living
in households earning less than
$10,000 per year to 40 percent
among participants living in
households earning $75,000 to
$99,999 annually. These groups
represented 5 percent and 10
percent of all residential wildlife-watching
participants, respec-tively.
Participants in house-holds
earning $10,000 to
$19,999 a year had a participa-tion
rate of 26 percent and
constituted 8 percent of all
residential recreationists. The
participation rate among
recreationists with annual house-hold
incomes of $20,000 to
$24,999 was 28 percent, making
up 6 percent of all residential
participants. People with annual
household incomes of $25,000
to $29,999 participated at a rate
of 32 percent and made up 6
percent of all residential partici-pants.
Those people with annual
household incomes of $30,000
to $34,999, representing
6 percent of the residential
participants, had a participation
rate of 30 percent. Those
whose annual incomes totaled
$35,000 to $39,999 showed a
participation rate of 34 percent
while representing 6 percent
of all residential participants.
Persons from households with
incomes of $40,000 to $49,999
chalked up a participation rate
of 36 percent and represented
11 percent of all residential
participants. Among the 18
percent of residential partici-pants
who reported annual
household incomes of $50,000
to $74,999, the participation rate
was 34 percent. Finally, those
individuals with annual house-hold
incomes of $100,000 or
more reported a participation
rate of 37 percent, representing
8 percent of the of all residential
recreationists. Fourteen percent
of the residential wildlife-watching
sample did not
report their income.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
22%
26%
28%
32%
30%
34%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
36%
34%
40%
$100,000 or
more 37%
42
Education and Race of
Residential Participants
Among residential participants, a
wide range of educational
backgrounds was recorded. The
highest rate of participation was
found among recreationists with
5 years or more of college, 43
percent. They made up 16
percent of all residential wildlife-watching
participants. The
lowest participation rate, 16
percent, was among people with
8 years of education or less, 3
percent of all residential partici-pants.
The participation rate
among those with 9 to 11 years
of education was 23 percent.
They constituted 8 percent of all
residential participants. Resi-dential
recreationists with 12
years of education, 32 percent of
all residential participants, had a
participation rate of 27 percent.
Participants with 1 to 3 years of
college had a participation rate
of 32 percent, while those with 4
years of college had a participa-tion
rate of 35 percent in 1996.
Those groups represented 24
percent and 16 percent of all
residential wildlife-watching
participants, respectively.
A wide variety of participation
rates was found among the
different races. For the U.S.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Education
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
16%
23%
27%
32%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
35%
43%
5 years or
more of
college
16%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Education
12 years
32%
4 years
of college
16%
1 to 3 years
of college
24%
9 to 11 years
8%
8 years
or less
3%
43
Residential Participants,
by Education and Race
(In millions)
Total participants 60.8
Education
0 to 8 years 2.0
9 to 11 years 4.9
12 years 19.3
1 to 3 years of college 14.7
4 years of college 9.8
5 years or more of college 9.9
Race
White 56.6
Black 1.9
Other 2.2
Source: Table 42
10%
34%
15%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Race
White
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Race
Other
4%
Black
3%
Black
White
93%
Other
population, 34 percent of the
White population engaged in
residential wildlife-watching
activities, 10 percent of the
Black population enjoyed such
activities, and 15 percent of
individuals of other races partici-pated.
Of the total number of
residential participants, 93
percent were White, 3 percent
were Black, and 4 percent were
all other races.
44
51%
97%
42%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants, by Activity
Observe
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants in State of Residence
and Other States
In state of
residence and
in other states
19%
Photograph
In state of
residence
only
68%
Feed
Other states
only
13%
Nonresidential
Activities Highlights
In 1996, almost 24 million
people 16 years old and older
took trips away from home for
the primary purpose of observ-ing,
feeding, or photographing
wildlife. They constituted 38
percent of all wildlife-watching
participants. The most popular
nonresidential activity was
observing wildlife. Almost 23
million participants, 97 percent
of all nonresidential participants,
observed wildlife on an average
of 12 days during the year.
Photographing wildlife was
enjoyed by 12.0 million people,
51 percent of all nonresidential
participants, with an average of
7 days per participant. Nearly
10 million people fed wildlife
on an average of 9 days while
away from home. This consti-tuted
42 percent of all
nonresidential recreationists.
Eighty-seven percent of all
nonresidential participants took
trips within their state of resi-dence.
Sixty-eight percent of
the nonresidential participants
took trips only in their state of
residence, 19 percent took trips
both in their state of residence
and to another state, and 13
percent took trips only to other
states. Altogether, 32 percent of
nonresidential participants took
at least some of their trips to
other states.
Nonresidential
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Observers 22.9
Photographers 12.0
Feeders 10.0
Total days 314
Observing 279
Photographing 79
Feeding 90
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 36
45
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed by
Nonresidential
Participants
In 1996, many types of wildlife
were enjoyed by the 23.7 million
people who took trips for the
primary purpose of observing,
feeding, or photographing fish
and wildlife in the United States.
Birds attracted the attention of
the largest number of people,
17.7 million individuals, 75
percent of all nonresidential
participants 16 years old and
older. Over 14 million people
observed waterfowl on their trips.
Shorebirds such as herons and
pelicans were enjoyed by 9.5
million people. Almost 13 million
people observed songbirds; 10.6
million, birds of prey; and 6.5
million, other birds.
Land mammals such as
deer, bear, and coyotes drew
as much attention as birds.
Approximately 17.7 million
participants, 75 percent of all
nonresidential participants,
observed, fed, or photographed
land mammals. Fish attracted
the attention of 8.4 million
participants, 36 percent of all
nonresidential recreationists.
Almost 3.5 million people,
15 percent of all nonresidential
participants, observed, fed,
or photographed marine mam-mals
such as whales, seals,
and dolphins. Other wildlife
such as butterflies, snakes,
and turtles were of interest to
11.5 million nonresidential
participants, 49 percent of all
wildlife-watching participants.
Nonresidential
Participants, by Type of
Wildlife Observed, Fed,
or Photographed
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Birds, total 17.7
Waterfowl 14.3
Songbirds 12.9
Birds of prey 10.6
Shore birds 9.5
Other birds 6.5
Land mammals, total 17.7
Small land mammals 15.2
Large land mammals 13.2
Fish 8.4
Marine mammals 3.5
Other 11.5
(turtles, butterflies, etc.)
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 39
75%
75%
36%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants Who Observed,
Fed, or Photographed Wildlife
(Total participants: 23.7 million)
Birds
Land
mammals
Fish
15%
49%
Marine
mammals
Other (turtles,
butterflies, etc.)
46
Area or Site Visited
by Nonresidential
Participants
In 1996, both public and private
areas provided significant
opportunities for Americans to
enjoy wildlife-watching activities.
Approximately 8 million, or 34
percent of all nonresidential
participants, said they had
visited both public and private
areas during 1996. Many non-residential
participants, 12.0
million or 51 percent, reported
visiting only public areas to
enjoy their activities, while 2.4
million or 10 percent of nonresi-dential
participants visited only
private areas.
People also visited many differ-ent
types of wildlife habitat while
pursuing their activities during
1996. An estimated 18.3 million
people visited woodland habi-tats,
77 percent of the nonresi-dential
participants. Lakes and
streamsides also attracted a
large number of visitors, 16.3
million people or 69 percent of
the total. Brush-covered areas
and open fields attracted a
similar number of people, 14.1
million (59 percent), and 14.8
million (63 percent), respectively.
Wetlands were visited by 10.4
million, or 44 percent of all
nonresidential participants, and
manmade areas had 9.1 million
recreational visitors, 39 percent
of all nonresidential participants.
Oceanside areas were visited by
6.4 million people accounting for
27 percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Other types of
habitats accounted for 3.3
million nonresidential partici-pants,
14 percent of the total
nonresidential population.
Nonresidential
Participants, by
Site Visited
(In millions)
Total participants 23.7
Woodland 18.3
Lake or streamside 16.3
Open field 14.8
Brush-covered area 14.1
Wetland, marsh, swamp 10.4
Manmade area 9.1
Oceanside 6.4
Detail does not add to total because of
multiple responses.
Source: Table 38
69%
77%
63%
Type of Site Visited by
Nonresidential Participants
Woodland
Nonresidential Participants,
by Area Visited
Public and
private
34%
Lake or
streamside
Unspecified
5%
Open field
Private only
10%
Public only
51%
Brush-covered
area
Wetland,
marsh, swamp
Manmade
area
Oceanside
59%
44%
39%
27%
47
Nonresidential
Participants by
Geographic Division
In 1996, 201 million people 16
years old and older lived in the
United States. Of those individu-als,
12 percent participated in
nonresidential activities.
Nonresidential participation
rates ranged from 9 percent in
the East South Central Division
to 16 percent in the Mountain
Division. Participants in the
Middle Atlantic and West South
Central Divisions had participa-tion
rates of 10 percent. Indi-viduals
in the South Atlantic
and Pacific Divisions recorded
participation rates of 11 percent.
The New England, East North
Central, and West North Central
Divisions all had participation
rates of 14 percent—above the
national participation rate of
12 percent.
Nonresidential Wildlife-Watching Participation
(National participation rate: 12%)
West South
Central
10% East South
Central
9%
South
Atlantic
11%
New
England
14%
Middle
Atlantic
10%
East
North
Central
14%
West North
Central
14%
Mountain
16%
Pacific
11%
48
Sex and Age of
Nonresidential
Participants
Nearly equal numbers of males
and females 16 years old and
older enjoyed nonresidential
wildlife-watching activities. In
1996, 12 percent of American
males and 11 percent of
American females enjoyed
observing, feeding, or photo-graphing
wildlife away from
home. Among the 23.7 million
nonresidential participants, 50
percent (11.7 million) were male,
and 50 percent (11.9 million)
were female.
The age group with the most
nonresidential participants,
6.9 million, was the 35- to 44-
year-olds who had a participa-tion
rate of 16 percent. This
group was closely followed by
the 5.3 million participants in the
45- to 54-year-old age group
whose participation rate was 15
percent. These two groups
represented 29 percent and 22
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively.
There were 4.6 million partici-pants
in the 25- to 34-year-old
age group, 19 percent of all non-residential
participants. Thirteen
percent of the people in this age
group participated in nonresi-dential
activities. The 55- to
64-year-old age group, which
had a participation rate of 11
percent, numbered 2.5 million
participants and represented 10
percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Six percent of
persons 65 years old and older
participated in nonresidential
Percent of Nonresidential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Sex
Men
50%
Women
50%
11%
12%
Percent of U.S. Population 16
Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Sex
Men
Women
Primary Nonresidential
Participants by Sex
and Age
Total, both sexes 23.7 million
Male 11.7 million
Female 11.9 million
Total, all ages 23.7 million
16 to 17 0.6 million
18 to 24 1.7 million
25 to 34 4.6 million
35 to 44 6.9 million
45 to 54 5.3 million
55 to 64 2.5 million
65 and older 2.1 million
Source: Table 41
49
activities. They represented 9
percent of all participants.
Participants 18 to 24 years
old numbered 1.7 million.
They accounted for 7 percent of
all nonresidential participants
and had a participation rate of 8
percent. Finally, persons 16 to
17 years old had a participation
rate of 9 percent. These 608
thousand individuals comprised
3 percent of all nonresidential
participants.
55 to 64
10%
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants by Age
25 to 34
19%
45 to 54
22%
35 to 44
29%
18 to 24
7%
16 and 17
65 and 3%
over
9%
Percent of U.S. Population
Who Participated, by Age
16 and 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
9%
8%
13%
16%
65 and older
45 to 54
55 to 64
15%
11%
6%
50
Size of Residence of
Nonresidential
Participants
Nonresidential wildlife-watching
activities were enjoyed by a
substantial number of people
from both urban and rural areas.
In 1996, 11 percent of all per-sons
living in Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (MSA’s) took
trips primarily for the enjoyment
of wildlife. They comprised 75
percent of all nonresidential
participants. Those living in
MSA’s with populations of
1,000,000 or more participated
at a rate of 11 percent and
represented 45 percent of all
nonresidential participants. The
participation rate for nonresiden-tial
recreationists in MSA’s with
populations of 250,000 to
999,999—20 percent of all
nonresidential participants—was
12 percent. MSA’s with popula-tions
of 50,000 to 249,999 had a
participation rate of 13 percent
and participants therein repre-sented
11 percent of all nonresi-dential
recreationists. Those
participants residing in areas
outside an MSA had a participa-tion
rate of 14 percent and
represented 25 percent of the
nonresidential total.
Percent of Nonresidential
Participants 16 Years Old and
Older, by Residence
(Total nonresidential participants: 23.7 million)
Small
MSA
11%
Large
MSA
45%
Outside
MSA
25%
Medium
MSA
20%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Residence
(12% of total U.S. population participated)
Large MSA
(1,000,000
or more)
11%
12%
13%
14%
Medium MSA
(250,000 to
999,999)
Small MSA
(50,000 to
249,999)
Outside
MSA
51
Income of
Nonresidential
Participants
People from households at
all income levels enjoyed wild-life-
watching activities away
from home. Participation rates
ranged from 6 percent for those
in households earning less than
$10,000 per year (4 percent of
all nonresidential participants)
to 17 percent in those house-holds
earning $100,000 or
more annually (10 percent of
all nonresidential participants).
Following close behind this
income group were participants
from households earning
$50,000 to $74,999 and $75,000
to $99,999 per year with partici-pation
rates of 16 percent. They
represented 22 percent and 11
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively. Those
in the $35,000 to $39,999 and
$40,000 to $49,999 income
groups had a participation rate
of 14 percent, and constituted 6
percent and 11 percent of all
nonresidential participants,
respectively. Of those with an
annual household income of
$25,000 to $29,999, 13 percent
enjoyed nonresidential activities.
They represented 7 percent
of the nonresidential total.
Participants in the $30,000 to
$34,999 household income
group had a 12 percent partici-pation
rate, and represented
6 percent of all nonresidential
recreationists. Lastly, individuals
with household earnings of
$10,000 to $19,999 or $20,000
to $24,999 recorded participa-tion
rates of 10 percent. They
represented 8 percent and 6
percent of all nonresidential
participants, respectively. Ten
percent of the nonresidential
wildlife-watching sample did
not report their income.
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Income
Less than
$10,000
$10,000 to
19,999
$20,000 to
24,999
$25,000 to
29,999
6%
10%
10%
13%
12%
14%
$40,000 to
49,999
$50,000 to
74,999
$75,000 to
99,999
$30,000 to
34,999
$35,000 to
39,999
14%
16%
16%
$100,000 or
more 17%
52
Education and
Race of Nonresidential
Participants
People of all educational levels
participated in nonresidential
activities in 1996. Two percent of
the U.S. population with 8 years
of education or less participated
in a nonresidential wildlife-watching
activity, 1 percent of
the nonresidential total. In
comparison, 22 percent of the
population with 5 years or more
of college joined in nonresiden-tial
activities and represented 21
percent of all nonresidential
participants. The participation
rate of persons with 9 to 11
years of education was 7 per-cent.
These participants made
up 6 percent of all nonresidential
enthusiasts. Those with 12
years of education had a 9
percent participation rate and
represented 27 percent of the
nonresidential total. Participants
with 1 to 3 years of college
participated at a rate of 13
percent, contributing 26 percent
to the nonresidential total.
Lastly, 16 percent of those with 4
years of college participated in
nonresidential activities, making
up 18 percent of all nonresiden-tial
participants.
The participation rates among
races varied greatly. Thirteen
Nonresidential Participants, by
Education and Race
Total participants 23.7 million
Education
8 years or less 0.3 million
9 to 11 years 1.5 million
12 years 6.4 million
1 to 3 years of college 6.0 million
4 years of college 4.4 million
5 years or more of college 5.1 million
Race
White 22.1 million
Black 0.5 million
Other 1.1 million
Source: Table 41
5 years or
more of
college
21%
Percent of Residential Participants
16 Years Old and Older, by Education
12 years
4 years 27%
of college
18%
1 to 3 years
of college
26%
9 to 11 years
6%
8 years
or less
1%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Education
8 years
or less
9 to 11
years
12 years
1 to 3 years
of college
2%
7%
9%
13%
4 years
of college
5 years
or more
of college
16%
22%
53
percent of all White individuals
living in the U.S. participated in
nonresidential activities in 1996,
2 percent of all Black individuals
participated, and 7 percent of
individuals of other races partici-pated.
Of the total 23.7 million
nonresidential participants, 93
percent were White, 2 percent
were Black, and 5 percent were
other races.
2%
13%
7%
Percent of U.S. Population
16 Years Old and Older Who
Participated, by Race
White
Black
Other
Percent of Residential
Participants 16 Years Old
and Older, by Race
Other
5%
Black
2%
White
93%
54
1991-1996 Comparison
of Wildlife-Watching
Activity
The number of people observ-ing,
photographing, or feeding
wildlife in the United States in
1996 was substantially less than
in 1991. There were 17 percent
fewer people wildlife watching in
1996, with 18 percent fewer
residential participants and 21
percent fewer nonresidential
participants. However, the
number of days of nonresidential
wildlife watching did not change
(at the 95 percent confidence
level), and expenditures for
wildlife watching increased
21 percent.
The percentage of residential
participants that decreased the
most, 29 percent, were those
who visited public parks or other
public areas for the primary
purpose of observing, photo-graphing,
or feeding wildlife. The
number of 1996 residential
participants that did not change
relative to 1991 were those who
photographed wildlife and those
who maintained plantings or
natural areas.
All categories of nonresidential
participation decreased at least
15 percent in the number of
participants. The days of partici-pation
in nonresidential activities
did not decrease, however, when
compared at the 95 percent
confidence level.
Expenditures increased for the
equipment category, but not for
the trip-related category. Equip-ment
expenditures increased 35
percent. The purchase of auxil-iary
equipment such as tents
and backpacking equipment
increased 88 percent.
Number of Wildlife-
Watching Participants
(Millions)
76.1
62.9 342 314 $21.2
$25.7
1991 1996 1991 1996 1991 1996
Days of
Nonresidential
Activity*
(Millions)
Wildlife-Watching
Expenditures
(Billions)
*The difference is not significant at the 0.05 level.
Participants, days and expenditures 1991 1996 Percent
(Numbers in millions) Number Percent Number Percent change
Total wildlife watching ........................................... 76.1 100 62.9 100 -17
Residential ............................................................ 73.9 97 60.8 97 -18
Observe wildlife ................................................. 54.7 72 44.1 70 -21
Photograph wildlife ............................................ 17.0 22 16.0 25 -6*
Feed wild birds or other wildlife ......................... 65.4 86 54.1 86 -17
Visit public parks or areas ................................. 15.5 20 11.0 18 -29
Maint. Plantings or Natural Area ....................... 13.6 18 13.4 21 -1*
Nonresidential ....................................................... 30.0 39 23.7 38 -21
Observe Wildlife ................................................ 28.8 38 22.9 36 -21
Photograph Wildlife ........................................... 14.2 19 12.0 19 -15
Feed Wildlife ...................................................... 13.3 17 10.0 16 -25
Days, nonresidential ............................................. 342 100 314 100 -8*
Observing wildlife .............................................. 296 87 279 89 -6*
Photographing wildlife ....................................... 82 24 79 25 -3*
Feeding wildlife ................................................. 102 30 90 29 -12*
Total Wildlife-Watching Expenditure** ................. $21,242 100 $25,654 100 21
Trip-related ............................................................ 8,604 41 9,007 35 5*
Equipment ............................................................ 10,994 52 14,854 58 35
Wildlife-watching equipment ............................. 6,559 31 7,773 30 19*
Auxiliary equipment ........................................... 402 2 755 3 88
Special equipment ............................................ 4,032 19 6,326 25 57*
Other ..................................................................... 1,643 8 1,793 7 9*
* Not different from zero at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that for 95 percent of all possible samples, the estimate for one survey
year is not different from the estimate for the other survey year.
** 1991 expenditure estimates have been adjusted for inflation to be comparable to 1996 expenditure estimates. Excludes expenditures for
land lease and ownership, food for wildlife other than birds, boats and trip-related boating costs, cabins, and heating and cooking fuel
because the 1991 survey did not collect this information.
55
Tables
56
Guide to
Statistical
Tables
Purpose and
Coverage of Tables
The statistical tables of this
report were designed to meet
a wide range of needs for
those interested in knowing
about wildlife-related recreation.
Special terms used in these
tables are defined in
Appendix A.
The tables are based on re-sponses
to the 1996 Survey
which was designed to collect
data about participation in
wildlife-related recreation. To
have taken part in the Survey, a
respondent must have been a
U.S. resident (a resident of one
of the 50 states or the District of
Columbia). No one residing
outside the United States (in-cluding
U.S. citizens) was eli-gible
for interviewing. Therefore,
reported state and national
totals do not include participa-tion
by those who were not U.S.
residents or who were residing
outside the United States.
Comparability With
Previous Surveys
The numbers reported can be
compared with those in the 1991
Survey Reports. The methodol-ogy
used in 1996 was similar to
that used in 1991. These results
should not be directly compared
to results from Surveys earlier
than 1991 since there were
major change in meth